The Elusive – and not so ‘chaste’ – Agnietie Colijn

Bordering on the Conceivable … the elusive – and not so ‘chaste’ – Agneta (Agnietie) Colijn and her ‘Khoe’ descendants

by Mansell Upham

This article explores the parentage of a free-born ‘black’ woman Agneta (Agnietie) Colyn (born 1684) at the Cape of Good Hope serving in the household of Hans Oberholzer (from Zürich) – the Switzerland-born heemraad, deacon, free-butcher and Van der Stel-acolyte.  Agneta Colijn has an illegitimate child named Hendrik Eksteen by the prominent free-burgher Heinrich Ostwald Eckstein (from Löbestein in Thuringia).  Hendrik Eksteen junior is later murdered by his Hottentot wife Griet and his stepson PhilipAgneta Colijn also has an illegitimate son by Johann Oberholzer (from Zürich in Switzerland).  She is thus mother to her two illegitimate sons, as well as surrogate mother to  Oberholzer’s other illegitimate child (by the Company slave woman Christina van Magdalena Smid), a daughter Johanna Barbara Oberholzer.[1]  The continued association of these three illegitimate children with Oberholzer’s legitimate offspring, is further confirmation of a slave-induced extended family.[2]  Significant, too, is the initial association of Bastiaen Colijn with Gerrit Sweers / Sweris and Baes Adriaen (Arie) Willemsz: van Brakel (from ‘s Hertogenbosch / Den Bosch in Noord-Brabant) and the free-black Louis van Bengale.

An ongoing conundrum has persisted concerning the parentage of the historical Cape-born woman found recorded as Agneta / Agnita (Agnietie / Angenitie) Colijn[3]

Maria een swarte vrye meit

Her baptism has been located and her paternity unambiguously recorded:

5 Mart    [1684]   Agnietie               

[de moeder] Maria een swarte vrije meit

de vader Bastiaen Jansen Colijn

[de getuijgen] Mostarts Marij [4]

The infant’s name Agneta is a latinised form of the Greek Hagni, derived from hagnos, meaning ‘chaste’, used in Northern Europe and also later associated with the Latin agnus, meaning ‘lamb’.

The father is none other than Sebastiaen (Bastiaen) Colijn (from ‘s-Gravenzande in Zuid-Holland).[5]

Because he is well documented as being biological father to at least four illegitimate children by Zwarte Maria Everts:[6]  as well as living in concubinage with her and even inheriting from her deceased estate, it would be natural to assume that the child baptized Agnietie must also be yet one more of their children.

The description of the infant’s mother as een swarte vrye meit supports such a plausible assumption. Hattingh – also accepts Agnieta Colijn to be the daughter of Swarte Maria Evert(s:) fathered by her concubine Bastiaen Jansz: Colijn van ‘s Gravesan.[7]  

Given the cryptic contents of this baptismal entry, one could still be left in two minds as to whether she is indeed the biological daughter of Zwarte Maria Everts: especially in view of the fact that Agnitie and her illegitimate children are excluded from the will (1713) left by Zwarte Maria Everts:.[8]  Likewise, they do not feature in the deceased estate papers and wills of Swarte Maria Evert’s illegitimate son Jan Willems: ten Damme (1679-1713)[9] and her illegitimate daughter Cornelia Everina Kraak (c. 1682-ante February 1726)[10]

Dutch Common Law of Inheritance (for both testate and intestate deaths) at the time dictates that, notwithstanding the testator’s right to testamentary freedom and the right to exclude the Orphan Chamber from adminstering the will, no direct descendant of the deceased person (also women) – even if born illegitimate – is allowed to be excluded from his / her rightful inheritance.  In the event of exclusion, the aggrieved descendant is legally entitled to remedy the default.[11]  The Law on Inheritance was clear and rigorously upheld and invariably by the inheriting parties themselves who had a vested interest in acquiring their inheritance.

It is unclear at this stage whether Agneta (Anietie) Colijn and her children were purposfully excluded from any inheritance by Maria Everts: in her last will – either punitively or by agreement (perhaps even with an earlier inheritance settlement). Also, no evidence has come to light of any inheritance claims against the deceased estate for any withheld legitimate portion.

Even so, Bastiaen Colijn may still, for some people, appear to have also fathered a child by possibly another black woman, also named Maria?

After revisiting the written records at my disposal yet again, I am nevertheless now more satisfied than before that she is indeed the biological daughter of Maria Everts:.

The Cape-born free-black woman – also initially known as Maria (Marij) van de Caep who later assumes the name Maria Schalks: [12]  – significantly also resides with Zwarte Maria Everts: and the latter’s biological mother Hoen/a aka Anna van Guinea[13] together with the latter’s biological daughter and the latter’s foster daughter the unbaptized Cape-born heelslag freed personal slave Elisabeth (Lijsbeth) van de Caep, later better known Lijsbeth Sanders: / Sandra.[14]  Given that she is only manumitted (8 May 1686) – just over two years later, the contemporary Maria Schalks: can be eliminated as a possible contender as biological mother to Agnitie Colijn.

It is worth noting that the patronymic-less Company slave Ansela van de Caep:[15] – likely half-sister to Maria Schalks: baptises (29 January 1690) a female infant also named Agnetie.[16]  The witness to the baptism (13 October 1686) of Ansela’s only son, Cornelis, also appears most probably to be none other than the recently manumitted Maria Schalks:

Cornelis          de moeder Ansila een slavin van de Comp[agn]y. Maria een vrie meit

This is more in keeping with the compelling likelihood that both Ansela van de Caep and Maria Schalks: are daughters of the Company slave Koddo aka Cornelia Arabus van Abisinna, originally gifted (1656) to the Cape’s 1st VOC Commander Jan van Riebeeck’s wife Maria de la Queillerie but soon thereafter expropriated by the visiting VOC Commissioner Rijckloff van Goens Sr..

Agnita Colijn’s adult life

Agnietie / Agnita Colijn becomes the centre of controversy when the newly arrived ex Batavia (30 March 1707) Ds. Engelbertus Franciscus le Boucq[17], in his efforts to ‘clean up’ the immoral laxity that had become prevalent at the colony, took it upon himself to dismiss (1707) the deacon of the church, the Swiss licensed butcher Johann (Hans) Oberholz / Oberholzer / Overholster[18] (from Zürich) who is accused of living with a concubine and having fathered her illegitimate children.[19]

Baptisms for two of her illegitimate children (only one of whom is fathered by Oberholzer) have been found – both illegitimate:

24 [21] Oct: [1702] van Jan Oveholster en Agnita Colyn onder getuyge van Jacob Pieters: Bodestyn gen[aam]t: – Johannes

8 Feb:[ruar]ij [1705] Van Hendrik Eksteen en Anna Maria [sic] Colijn onder getuijge van Louis van Bengale gen:[aam]t: – Hendrik

Oberholzer also fathers an illegitimate daughter Johanna Barbara aka Barbara Johanna Oberholzer by a Company slave woman who is baptized (24 February 1704).[20] This child later in adulthood goes by the name Oberholzer.

1704: 24 Feb:r[ua rij]  een kind van Jannetie Willemsz: [van Wijk] van de Caab [? – sic] gen[aam]t. Barbara, cast[ijs]:

While her baptism states that she is the daughter of Agnietie’s 1st cousin, the Cape-born Company slave Jannetje Willems: van Wijk[21], her manumission reveals that she is the daughter of Christijn van Machteld Schmidt van Maaij Claesje Jans: van Angola – mother and maternal grandmother both being matrons of the Company slave Lodge while her great-grandmother had been vroetvrou (‘midwife’) in the Lodge.[22]  She is also found at times in church records (usual when witnessing baptisms) recorded as Johanna Barbara despite the fact that she is both baptized and married as Barbara. Since the infant later marries Jannetje Willems: van Wijk’s own casties son, Paul / Paulus Hartog/h, the presumption, then, is that Jannetje is more likely to have been surrogate mother.  Hartog/h is formerly married to Petronella Philips: (the daughter of the freed personal slaves Philip van Boeton and Susanna van Boegis) and is the grandson of the freed Company Cape-born slave Johanna (Jannetje) Bastiaens: and the great-grandson of Koddo aka Cornelia Arabus van Abissina.

The relationship of Agnietie’s two or three illegitimate children to Johann (Hans) Oberholzer (from Zürich in Switzerland) is ultimately confirmed by the confrontation between Oberholzer and the church minister Ds. Engelbertus Franciscusle Boucq.[23]  The latter objects to Oberholzer’s appointment as deacon of the church.  Oberholzer had only been confirmed in his faith recently.  This renders him unfit for the position.  Furthermore, Oberholzer had been living for a long time in concubinage with “an unnamed black woman and fathered her children”.  Oberholzer denies these allegations saying that he had in dat leeven een weersin gekregen hebbende.  He denies paternity saying that the children have not been baptized with his name [sic]. 

According to the attestations of three free-burghers, however, the black woman in question is Agnietie Colijn.  When summoned by the deacon Jacob Pleunis[24], his wife[25] inquire from her whether she has had two sons or a son and a daughter.  Also expressing concern for their education as they are no longer infants, she adds:

“But, they are Overholster’s children.  Don’t be shy to admit it because they were, after all, born in his house.” 

Agnietie admits nothing.  Nobody present accepts her protestations, denials or silence.  

Pleunis adds:

“You can tell us who the father is, because I have also fathered a child by a black woman whose freedom I still want to buy”.[26] 

Oberholzer retaliates by suing the minister for crimen injuria.  Nothing comes of the legal action, however, as the highly unpopular minister is soon made to leave the colony.

The illegitimate Jan Overholster is later recorded living by himself on the fringes of the colony in ‘t velt.  Also with him was Jan Jacobsz: van de Caab (the son of the personal slaves Maria van Angola and Jacob van Macassar), who also spends time at the place of d’jonge Hans Jurgen Potgieter. He marries (6 September 1744) Sara Coetsee who may well be also his 3rd cousin.  She is the daughter of Elisabeth Louisz: and Jacobus Coetzee who, as eldest son, had been disowned by his parents presumably for cohabiting with a black woman.[27]  Sara’s mother is the daughter of Louis van Bengale and the notorious never baptised Lijsbeth Sanders: – foster daughter of the free-black Anna van Guinea and biological daughter of the never-freed Company slave Sabba aka Elizabeth (Lijsbeth) Arabus van Abissina.

Agnietie’s 2nd child the illegitimate Hendrik Eksteen is fathered by Hendrik Oostwald Eksteen[28] (from Löbenstein).  The baptism is witnessed by the free-black, Louis van Bengale. This child is later recorded on the fringes of the colony living (nomadically?) at the various places of the following free-burghers:  Jan Fuber, Andries du Toit, Cornelis Boshouwer, Charles du Plessis and significantly, he is also recorded alone (woon op zijn selfs).  He is later murdered by his Hottentot concubine Griet and his step-son Philip.[29] 

Hendrik Eksteen Jr.’s Murder

A veritable pioneer on the fringes of the expanding colony, his Hottentot concubine Griet by whom he has several children – jealous about his sexual relations with other Hottentot women – attempts (1758) to poison his tea. The poison is taken from an arrow belonging to the Hottentot Magerman supplied by her friend, another Hottentot woman Lysje

Her attempt at murder fails when an already suspicious Eksteen spits out the bitter-tasting tea which burns his lips, their illegitimate Bastaard-Hottentot son Piet who addresses his biological father as Baas – having already warned his father of his mother`s evil designs …

Eksteen, however, is soon thereafter finally murdered (1759) by his Khoe step-son Philip and the slave Galant at Buffelscraal adjoining his own place Middeldrift near the Gourits River.

While asleep, they beat him to death with a rijs stamper [‘rice pestle’] …

This is what Hans Heese writes about the murder:[30]

Een van die eerste opgetekende gevalle waar tradisionele Khoisan gif in ‘n moordpoging gebruik was, was in 1758-1759 toe Griet, ‘n Hottentottin. haar “man” met wie sy saamgeleef het, Hendrik Eksteen, probeer vergiftig het. Eksteen, vermoedelik die buite-egtelike seun van die Eksteen stamvader, het meer as twintig jaar met Griet op sy plaas Middeldrift by Gouritsrivier saamgeleef.  Uit hierdie verhouding is verskeie kinders gebore wat as Baster-Hottentotte in die regsdokumente beskryf word.  Toe Griet agterkom dat Eksteen met ander Khoisan vroue verhoudings aangeknoop het, het sy besluit om hom om die lewe te bring.  Sy het die hulp van die Khoisan-vrou, Lysje, ingeroep en laasgenoemde het gif van die pylpunte wat aan Magerman behoort het, afgekrap en aan Griet gegee.  Griet het die gif in tee opgelos en aan Eksteen gegee om te drink.  Eksteen het die tee egter uitgespoeg omdat dit bitter gesmaak het en sy lippe gebrand het.  Piet, die twintigjarige Baster-Hottentot seun van Eksteen by Griet (wat sy pa baas genoem het) het sy pa van die komplot teen hom gewaarsku.  Eksteen het egter die waarskuwing in die wind geslaan.  Kort hierna is Eksteen egter deur sy stiefseun, Philip, en die slaaf Galant op sy buurplaas Buffelscraal met ‘n rysstamper op sy bed vermoor.

An inventory of Eksteen’s deceased estate has survived and transcribed, follows hereunder – note that, although he appears to have ‘gone native’, there is no mention whatsoever of his illegitimate family:

[CA: MOOC 8/9, no. 2 – courtesy of TANAP]
Hendrik Eksteen
8 December 1758

Staat en inventaris mitsg:[ader]s waardeering van alle soodanige goederen en effecten als meede actien en crediten als door den landbouwer Hendrik Eksteen ab intestato zijn naargelaaten en metter dood ontruijmt, dewelke door d’ onderget:[eekening]e gecommitteerde Weesmeesteren volgens resolutie van den 21 9:b[e]r deeses jaars aan desselfs sig thans opgeevende naaste erfgenaam den landbouwer Jan Oberholster d’ oude onder cautie de restituendo der waarde van dien in contanten gelden door hem Oberholster ofte zijne erfgenaamen wanneer binnen den tijd van sesthien eerstvolgende jaaren iemand mogte te voorschijn koomen die aan sal kan koomen te thoonen nader regt tot dien boedel te hebben ofte dat bij Heeren Weesm:[eeste]ren bevonden mogte werden, dat deesen boedel ’t zij in ’t geheel ofte ten deele ten onregten mogte zijn afgegeeven, en ter hand gestelt, bestaande en gewaardeert als volgt, nam[en]:l[ijc]k

Een leening plaats genaamt de Middeldrift geleegen aan ’t Gaurits Revier200
een leening plaats gen:[aam]t de Buffels Kraal geleegen aan ’t Gaurits Revier100

Op de plaats

In de wagenmaakers winkel
2 bijlen1:–
1 dissel
5 avegaars1:24
1 naafboor
4 bijtels1:–
8 schaaven in soort
1 trek saag10:–
1 raam saag
1 schulp saag
1 parthij wagenmaakers houtwerk in soort10:–
In ’t woonhuijs
1 parthij bootervaaten10
2 karrens
5 ijsere potten6
7 emmers3
2 vergiet testen1
3 koeke pannen
2 koopere keetels2
1 tinne trekpot
2 klijne spiegels
1 slaave jongen gen:t Jonas van Mallabaar100
1 slaave jongen gen:t Galant van Boegies100
Op de werf
2 osse waagens40:–
334 beesten klijn en groot668:–
1300 schaapen klijn en groot325:–
10 paarden klijn en groot25:–
1 saadel3:–
2 ploegen met haar toebehooren10:–
1 eg6:24
2 graaven
2 picken
1 buldsak met 4 kussens en 1 combaars4:–
een obligatie ten lasten van den landbouwer Willem Mijer groot150:–
een obligatie ten lasten van den landbouwer Jacob Joubert100:–
een obligatie ten lasten van de wed:w Meering groot91:–
een obligatie ten lasten van den landbouwer Harmanus Wilkes groot50:–
een obligatie ten lasten van den landbouwer Harmanus Wilkes groot20:–70:–
een obligatie ten lasten van den landbouwer Dieterig Mulder groot66:32
een obligatie ten lasten van den burger aan Stellenbosch Philip Hartog groot33:16
een obligatie ten lasten van den burger Dirk van der Scheijf groot100:–
een obligatie ten lasten van den landbouwer Abraham de Klerck groot100:–
een obligatie ten lasten van den burger Johannes van der Scheijf20:–731:–
Boek schulden
Rudolf Camfer op 10 jonge veersen a rxs:5 ’t p:s50
Jan Buijs voor een nieuwe wagen50
Jacobus Vivie over 2 nieuwe wagen stellen10
Diederik Mulder over ses ossen debet48
Michiel Roomond over 3 ossen24
Adriaan van Braakel over 2 ossen debet18
N: Hofman over 2 ossen17
Harmanus Scheepers voor 2 ossen18235
Sulx den boedel suijver begroot is op een somma vanRd:s2593

Aldus g’inventariseert, gewardeert en gepasseert ter Weescamer aan Cabo de Goede Hoop den 8:e December 1758 ter presentie van den landbouwer Jan Oberholster d’ oudeals principaal mitsg:rs den burger Christoffel van Wieding en den landbouwer Frans Kruger Jacobsz: als desselfs borgen.

Als gecommitt:[eerd]e Weesm:[eest]ren: D:[anie]l Heijning, J:F:W: Böttiger

Voor den opgaaff: Dit merk + is door Jan Oberholster d’ oude eijgenhandig gestelt

Ter onser presentie als borgen: Christoffel von Wieding, Frans Kruger

Mij praesent: J:s H:s Blankenberg, Secret:[ari]s

Significantly, the name Eksteen has ramified in South Africa and Namibia amongst as a ‘Cape Coloured’ family name.  Hendrik Eksteen senior later marries (13 July 1704) the manumitted Company slave casties Sara / Zara Heyns, the daughter of the freed Eurafrican Maria Schalk(s:) van de Caep whose descendants initially become incorporated into the predominantly ‘White’, but Africa-born, colonial community.

Agnieta Colijn eventually finds ‘respectability’ when she marries as Agnieta Molijn[sic] at the Cape (21 August 1707) the overcassier Jan Jansz: van der Heijden (from Delft).  Significantly, Heinrich Ostwald Eksteen’s 3rd wife is born Van der Heiden and it is he who had fathered her illegitimate son of the same name as the father.  Agnieta Colijn and Jan van der Heyde appear in the Opgaaf (1709) together with 2 sons and 1 daughter.  They appear again (1712) listed immediately after Domingo van Bengale and his wife Maria van Bengale.  There is no mention of them, however, in 1716.  Are they victims of the smallpox epidemic of 1713?

Epilogue:  Through Western eyes, under Southern skies – Occidental accidents of History …

Seun van die Donderweer!

Dappere hardlooiende !Guru!

Fluister saggies, se’blief saggies,

Want skuld het ek g’n;

Los my!

ek’s dronkgeslaan

Ja, jy! O !Guru!

Seun van die Donderweer!


The settlement (and later colony) of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) at the Cape of Good Hope was a fluid microcosm of initially non-indigenous Company officials, soldiers, servants, free-burghers, slaves and convicts.  The Dutch, so it seems, never quite embrace fully (or physically) the autochthons (Hottentots and Bushmen) whose land they come to colonise – especially in terms of religion, miscegenation, assimilation and integration. This arms-length co-existence is generally all too often accepted uncritically. Invariably, the singular example of Krotoa (c. 1643-1674) – later when baptised and married, she is known as Eva Meerhoff) – is always touted, viz:

the oft-cited ‘fact’ that she was the colony’s only indigene to be baptised and marry according to Christian rites during the VOC period. 

Historian Dr. Con de Wet’s questionable statement: in his chapter on the Cape’s social and cultural life (Maatskaplike en Kulturele Lewe), compounds this faux perception: 

“In die oorspronklike bronne is daar geen [sic] bewyse gevind van gewone sosiale verkeer tussen vryliede en Hottentotte nie …” (In original [archival] sources, no evidence could be found of everyday intercourse between the [colony’s] free citizenry and the Hottentots).[32] 

De Wet leaves one wondering whether he alone could not find any such evidence in the records, or whether such non-discovery, might also have been the experience of all researchers of Cape history prior to his doctoral thesis.

Eva Meerhoff’s legacy as a failed experiment in civilization and diplomatic concession is then invariably presumed and perpetuated, serving as justification for the (undramatic?) exeunt by aborigines from the colony’s stage centre and apparent, late and limited, non-absorption into Cape colonial society during the entire VOC period. 

Only once the colony’s frontiers begin to expand, do colonists interface more intensely with aborigines – even cohabiting with their women. 

Enter the Bastaard … the Bastaard Hottentot … the Oorlammers, the Africaander / Afrikanersthe Griqua

To what extent did the VOC and the Dutch accommodate and integrate the aboriginal Khoe / San into colonial society? 

This is a question with which successive historians continue to grapple.  The converse must also be asked: 

To what extent did the Khoe / San accommodate and integrate the colonial Dutch into their non-colonial or inter-colonial world? 

To what extent were the autochthonous Khoe / San peoples effaced?

Or put, differently:

To what extent did these peoples efface themselves

Micro-historical and genealogical research and re-evaluation of extant records and recorded individuals – including women – from the earliest period of regular contact, collision and relations[33], help to provide answers to these questions. Too often, historians neglect to identify individually the characters in their drama and to contextualize each of them as a means of countering disceptive generalisations about human behaviour.

The emergence of this particular mixed race (Eurafrican) colonial by-product, has its earliest colonial beginnings with, for example, the baptism (8 February 1705) at the Cape of Good opof Hendrik Eksteen and his embracing of indigeneity by ‘going nagtive’.  The Eksteen Basters consequently become an important and vital case study in terms of what I would call the Kutykum Factor:

If one wishes them to dance, one need only give them a pipeful of tobacco, and then they stiffen their legs

and continually leap up and down, and meanwhile sing Hottendott Brukwa[34]… and this is the beginning  and end     of their continual song.  If one says to them Koros op Zey[35]  they push the scrap of sheepskin from before their privities to the back, and let the whole gear be seen, and laugh therewith … [36]

Simply put, this amounts to tit for tat[37].  The seadog[38]  David Tappen is not oblivious to the fact that perhaps the last laugh is on him.

Collusion and complicity cannot be excluded from the colonial equation when assessing the degree of intercourse (intersectionality?) between coloniser and colonised, the contact between victors and vanquished, the ambivalent relationships that ensued and the offspring.

Recent occidental historiography – even when made inscrutable and counter-ideological by Edward Said’s orientalism and not so long ago socially re-engineered by Thabo Mbeki’s Africanism  reborn – still tends to ‘actively affirm’ the underdog … so much so that we are still left with a seemingly unbridgeable divide between THEM and US … Somehow African, Australasian, Asian and American indigenes / aborigines / autochthons are exempt from accountability or granted amnesty – even when the historical record, albeit the colonial testimony of the victors, shows that these ‘First Nations’ contributed to their own colonisation, enslavement and demise. 

Jean O’Brien argues that ‘Native Americans’ have been rendered invisible because they aided and abetted their paleface invaders thereby constructing the myth of ‘Indian’ extinction.[39]  This is a compelling argument that tries to reverse the diatribal assault on Western civilisation – crudely reduced this would include the view that holds the white man (male?) to be solely responsible for all that is disingenuously deemed wrong in our world today.  Swiss historian Urs Bitterli’s practice of Geistesgeschichte (a untranslatable cross between ‘history of ideas’ and ‘history of mentalities’), has helped us to transform colonial history into cultural history:  cultures collide and it is in the conflict that we can contextualise our ancestors.  Not all cultural encounters are the same.  According to Bitterli, however, these generally take the form of contacts, collisions and relationships.[40]

American historian Richard Elphick’s cautious multi-causal, open-ended – but constraining much ado about nothing – assessment of our own initial cultural close-encounters-of-a-first-kind in his Khoikhoi and the founding of White South Africa, is worthy of revisionist scrutiny:[41]

Thus, the leading features of Khoikhoi decline were the complex interconnections of its many causes, and the predominance of broad processes over discrete episodes of diplomacy and conquest.  For these reasons Khoikhoi decline was a mystery both to the Europeans who initiated it and to nineteenth-century investigators who vainly sought to explain it by a single cause, be it genocide or plague.  For these reasons, too, the story has hardly ever been told in recent times; it has few villains, fewer heroes, and little of the drama that attracts novelists and historians to later phases of settler-native conflict in southern Africa.  Yet the process of Khoikhoi decline should be understood, and not only because brown and white South Africans still live with its consequences today.  For it is a fact worth pondering that the European subjugation of southern Africa began, not because statesmen or merchants willed it, nor because abstract forces of history made it necessary;  but because thousands of ordinary men [sic], white and brown, quietly pursued their goals, unaware of their fateful consequences.

Truce and Reconciliation?

Have South Africans reconciled themselves zetetically and truthfully to their genealogical past?  Is it still necessary, as implied by Thabo Mbeki, to protect the enclave of ‘European civilisation’ perched precariously at the Cape of Good Hope and advance the purposes of the then temporary sojourners? 

 Perhaps the answer lies, not only in responding to the exhortations of Kutykum! and Koros op Zey! – but to then laugh and walk away …

[1] Oberholzer fathers illegitimate and legitimate sons both named Johannes,as he does daughters both named Johanna Barbara.

[2] For many years already, the writer has been interrogating the tolerance, acceptance and incorporation of slave-owners of their illegitimate offspring into Cape households during the period of Dutch colonisation of the Cape of Good Hope, vide Mansell G. Upham, ‘Johann Vosloo: If the biological or putative father in early Cape colonial society was white and/or Christian: would the child born to an enslaved woman be entitled to freedom on reaching majority?  What is the meaning of vrij geboren?  Can a free-burgher’s slave’s child be vrij geboren – is this possible?’, Capensis & Mansell G. Upham, ‘Hell and Paradise … Hope on Constantia  – De Hel en Het ParadijsDe Hoop op Constantia Jan Grof (dies ante 1700) and his extended family at the Cape of Good Hope – a glimpse into family, household, patriarchy, matriarchy, bondage, marriage, concubinage, adultery, bastardy, métissage, manumission, propinquity and consanguinity in 17th century Dutch South Africa before slavery’s abolition, the weakening of kinship and emergence of the modern nuclear family’, Uprooted LivesUnfurling the Cape of Good Hope’s Earliest Colonial Inhabitants (1652-1713), featured on the First Fifty Years Project.

[3] This question was raised again recently in an online presentation (8 October 2021) ‘Zwarte Maria, Camps Bay and Constantia Wine’ by Sigi Howes for the Genealogical Society of South Africa (Western Cape Branch) relying mostly on information gleaned from Mansell Upham, Uprooted Lives – Unfurling the Cape of Good Hope’s Earliest Colonial Inhabitants (1652-1713) on the FFY Project Website & Joanne Gibson, ‘SA wine history: The largely forgotten Colijns of Constantia’ (11 December 2018) – &

[4] Born in slavery, she is the Eurafrican daughter of the later freed personal slave Elisabeth (Lijsbeth) van Angola who 1st belongs to the free-burgher Wouter Cornelisz Mostaert [Mostert] (from Utrecht) and his wife Hester Jans: / Weijers: Klim (from Lier in present-day Antwerp Province, Belgium).  Following Mostaert’s death (1677), her patronesse (‘mistress’) the Widow Mosteart’s marries (12 March 1684) Jan Holsmit (from Sittard in Limburg).  There is a strong possibility that her biological father is the free-Saldanha trader Bartholomeus (Bart / Bartel) Borns (from Leeuwarden in Friesland) – Maria [Bartels:] van de Caep alias Mosterts Marij  & Jan Holtsmit’s Marij [CA: MOOC 7/1/4, no. 155 – free-black according to will [J. Hoge, Personalia of the Germans at the Cape]; halfslag daughter of Lijsbeth van Angola & former slave of Wouter Cornelisz: Mostaert (from Utrecht); 5 March 1684: witnesses baptism of Agnietie Colijn, daughter of Maria een swarte vrye meit [? Maria Schalks: van de Caep] baptized Cape 5 March 1684 (witness: Mostarts Mary); witnesses baptism (27 May 1685) of Sijbrand (son of Jan Willemsz: Vermeulen (from Utrecht) & Cape-born Catharina Opklim van Bengale) – former co-slave in the Mostaert / Holsmit household: a[nn]o’ 1685 den 27 dito (Mai) Sybrant de moeder Catrina van Bengale en de vader Jan Willemse Vermeulen van Utrecht vryman – [witness]  Maria Mostert;marries (1stly) [civil union only?] Cornelis Heren / Heermans:(e); 1685: Cornelis Heermanse, stuurman accompanies expedition with Simon van der Stel to Namaqualand [Anna J. Boeseken: Simon van der Stel en sy Kinders , p. 74]; 1685 (Opgaaf): master gardener (Baas tuinier); 1687: equipagiemeester; 19 June 1687: banished / deported  (3 years in public works – frequenting French ships) [Resolusies van die Politieke Raad, vol. III, pp. 166-167]; 31 March 1690: stuurman on Noord whose crew were stranded inland [Resolusies van die Politieke Raad, vol. III, pp. 217];1700 (Opgaaf): No. 56: Maria Bartels: 1 woman; 7 oxen; Stellenbosch; 14 June 1705: she is viciously assaulted by Jacomina Carteniers & Jacobus van den Berg [Adam Tas Diary, pp. 40-41; CA: CJ (Crim. Prosesstukken, 1705-1725), pp.  31, 33-34 & 36]; marries Stellenbosch (24 April 1701): Christiaan Maartense van Hamburg jongm.[an] met Maria Bartelz: van Caab wed[uw]e Corn.[eli]s HerenChristian / Christiaen Maartens: / Martens: / Martensz: / Martins(z:) (from Hamburg);  soldier at VOC outpost (buitenpost) Clapmuts prosecuted (1688) with sergeant Kerkendaardt & corporal Jacob Cloete (from Cologne) for trading illegally with Cape indigenes – acquitted with a warning but Cloete islater found murdered with multiple stab wounds & killer/s never found [Dan Sleigh, Die Buiteposte: VOC-buiteposte onder Kaapse bestuur 1652-1795, pp. 200-201]; 1692 (Opgaaf): No. 36:  Christian Martinsz: 1 man; 1 snaphaen; 1 degen; Cape; 8 August 1695: Floris van Bengale (aged 24) sold by Christiaen Martens: of Stellenbosch to Mah[ie]u Rijcke for Rds. 80; 1699: resident at Stellenbosch; insolvent and property sold by public auction (CA: C 728, p. 60); 1707: Martens dies – falls from his horse and trampled to death [CA: 1/STB, vol. 624 (Attestation, 10 March 1707)].

[5] Bastiaen Janse van s’ Gravensan.He is Bastiaen Jansz: Colijn (from s’ Gravensand).  Listed in Muster (1672):    Huijs timmerluij

Adriaen van Brakel baes [later free-burgher]

Gerrit Sweers


Bastiaen Janssen [? Colijn] [CA:  VC 39, vol. 2:  Muster Roll of Officers and Men at the Cape 1656-1673 [pp. 137-155].  Later a free-burgher, he fathers 5 of Maria Evert:’s children.  They live together as common law husband and wife being unable to marry legally:  she was legally separated from her free-black husband Jackie Joy van Angola and even if a divorce proper had been granted, it would have been illegal for her as a heelslag to marry a white or European man.  

[6] These were: Johannes Colijn (1692-1743), Johanna Colijn (1694-ante 1740), Maria Colijn (born 1696) and Evert Colijn (born 1700). In her will she signs her name Maria Evert – using a patronymic that identifies her biological father as being one Evert.  He is the freed slave Evert van Guinea – the 1st personal slave to be manumitted (22 August 1659) at the Cape.  A collaborator with the colonial Dutch, he is freed for divulging the hiding places of his fellow runaway slaves.  That his daughter is heelslag is corroborated by the fact that she and her mother Hoen/a aka Anna van Guinea are resold into slavery and once freed become part of Evert’s household.  Swarten Evert Marij (1664-1713):  she was Maria Evert / Everts / Evertse but also known as Swarte Maria and Marij van de Caep.  She is the daughter of Evert van Guinea & Anna van Guinea.  She is foster sister to Lijsbeth van de Caep aka Lijsbeth Sanders:.  She signs her name Maria Evert.  Born at the Cape (c. 1663), she marries the free-black Gracias Maijalas van Angola.  Judicially separated from her lawful husband (who is also known as Jackie Joy and who claimed that she had tried to poison him), she has children by various men, inter alia the resident surgeon Willem ten Damme, one possibly named Kraak & the free-burgher Bastiaan Jansz: Colyn.  She is listed in the Opgaaf (1691, 1693, 1698 & 1700). She dies an extremely wealthy woman during the smallpox epidemic (1713).  She owns what is Camps Bay today and the farm Klawervleide Claveres Valleij … at Darling.  She has grazing & hunting rights in ‘t veld by de Sonquasfonteyn & aan de Drooge valley buyten de Groene Cloof.[CJ 2, p. 114 (3 July 1688); CJ 2587 No. 62 (1713); RLR2, p. 85 (3 November 1713); RLR2, p. 119 (1 May 1714); CTD 11 Title Deeds, Cape, vol. 2, fol. 6 (13 April 1711); Deeds Office, Transport en Schepenkennissen (1724), Transportaktes T 1623 & T 1624 (3 October 1712); J. Leon Hattingh,’Grondbesit in die Tafelvallei – Deel I:  Die Eksperiment:  Vryswartes as grondeienaars, 1652-1710’, Kronos (1985), vol. 10, pp. 32-48].

[7] J. Leon Hattingh, ‘Beleid en Praktyk: Die doop van slawekinders en die sluit van gemengde verhoudings aan die Kaap voor 1720’, Kronos, vol. 5 (1982), p. 38.

[8] CA: MOOC 7/1/2, no. 26 (Will: Maria Everts: geboortig aan dese plaats oud omtrent 50 jaar, 8 June 1713).

[9] CA: MOOC 7/1/2, no. 27 (Will: Jacobus Willemsz: ten Damme, 1713).

[10] CA: CJ 2603, no. 13 (Joint Will: Pieter Christiaan Barentsz [he signs his name Behrensz & Catharina Everina Kraak [she signs Catharina Everina Kraak ], 1725).

[11] Cf. the claim made by the illegitimate Arnoldus Johannes Basson (1702-1742) when excluded from the deceased estate of his mother Zacharia Jans: Vissers:: [CA: MOOC 5/1 (21 February 1722): his inheritance from mother’s estate is disputed by his mother’s 2nd husband: 1722; [CA: MOOC 5/1 (1722. 8. April)] Andries Kruger [Krügel] die volg:[en]s laatste vergadering voor deese camer geciteert was, binnen koomede wierd hem zijn indiffecte testam:[en]t tusschen hem en zijn overledene vrouw Zacharia Jansz: Visser voor gehouden en hem afgevraagte, of niets wist dat daar is een kind van zijn vrouw voor bijgegaan was, waar op hij antwoorde van neen, waar op hem aangeseijt is, dat het selve daar door vervalt, en dat hij staat en Inventaris, mitsg:[ade]rs taxatie zijns boedels moet geeven, om daar uijt te konnen ontwaaren, de ware moeders erfportie voor d’ kinderen ‘t welk hij als doen presenteerden versoekende dat sulx door gecommitt:[eerd]e weesm:[eeste]ren in presentie van de mondige kinderen mogt werden gedaan, welke presentatie de wed:[duw]e Jan Mulder en Gerrit van der Lind voor de Camer en binnen geroepen zijnde is voorgehouden en haar afgevraag, off zijt daar meede te vreeden waren, en g’antwoord hebbend van ja, is wijders geresolveert, dat sulx door 2 gecomm:[itteerde]e Leeden den EE: Jan Thobias Rhenius en Hendrik Oostwalt Eksteen op den 13 deesen sal  werden gedaan.

[12] Marij(e) van de Caep (1664-1700) – she is Maria Schalk, the illegitimate daughter of the Company slave  Koddo, alias Plad Oorby Willem Schalksz: van der Merwe (from Broek / Oud-Beyerland) & step-daughter to the free-black Serry aka Abraham (Abram) van Guinea.  Born in slavery at the Cape, she is baptized (1665) & manumitted (1868) by Council of Policy resolution together with 2 other Cape-born halfslag Company slaves, Armozijn de Grote (Mrs Guilliam Frisnet) & Jannetje Bort (Mrs Dirk van Coningshoven),.  She is also possibly sister to Jannetje [Bastiaens:] van de Caep, the wife of Matthijs Calmer.  After her manumission, Maria Schalk: resides with Anna van Guinea.  She marries (23 September 1696) Paul Heins / Heyns (from Leipzig) by whom she already had 4 children (Sara, Johannes, Anna & Hendrik).  Two more children (Michiel Africanus & Maria Cornelia) are born after their marriage.  She dies (1700).  Her husband later marries the widow of Douw Gerbrandt: Steyn (from Leeuwarden in Friesland), the Cape-born vroetdrouw (‘midwife’) Maria Lozee [CA: MOOC 14/212].

[13] Hoen/a aka Anna van Guinea – slave in the household of the Cape’s 1st commander, Jan van Riebeeck & Maria de Queillerie.  She arrives as slave cargo from Popo on the Hasselt at the Cape (6 May 1658).  She joins up with Swarten Evert van Guinea (de vrije Caffer Evert), the father of her youngest child (the heelslag Maria Evert:), who had been granted land, a garden (1669) in Table Valley, by Commander Jacob Borghorst.  He had been rewarded with his freedom by Jan van Riebeeck for revealing the whereabouts of the runaway slaves (his compatriots!) during the mass slave desertion of 1658.  He is convicted (3 July 1680) … over nalatiheijt van het overlevenen den briefjes raeckende het bereijden van branthoutAnna is assaulted by the slave woman belonging to the free-burgher Steven Jansz: Botma (from Wageningen in Gelderland) who is subsequently convicted (2 September 1680) & punished.  Anna had verbally abused her beyond her endurance [possibly this slave Maria van Angola?].  Anna & Evert are listed in the Opgaaf (1671, 1672, 1673, 1674-8, 1679, 1682, 1685).  He purchases (1678) a garden adjoining his in Table Valley from Hendrik Evertsz: Schmidt (from Ibbenbueren) and Adriana Sterreveld (from Nieuw-Nederland).  They farm (1682) on Welgelegen at Stellenbosch. This farm Evert sells (1685) to Andries Oelofsen (from Christiania in Norway) which title deeds Oelofsen finally obtains (1715).  Anna is widowed (by 1688) & listed with 1 daughter and 12 cattle in the Opgaaf at Stellenbosch (her neighbour is Johann Herbst).  She is listed (1691) in Table Valley alone with 2 daughters and in 1695 with 5 children (presumably grandchildren and foster children) [Deeds Office, Transport en Schepenkennissen: Transportakte T 165 (1678), H.[einrich] E.[vert] Smith & Evert van Guinee (10 November 1678); CJ 2, p. 114 (3 July 1680); VC 39;  Deeds Office, O.S.F. 1, fol. 239; Cadastral Calendar; A 1657; J. L. Hattingh,’Grondbesit in die Tafelvallei – Deel I:  Die Eksperiment:  Vryswartes as grondeienaars, 1652-1710’, Kronos (1985), vol. 10, pp. 32-48].

[14] CA:  CJ 291 (Criminele Processtukken, 25 April 1689) sworn statement by Marij van de Caep [Maria Schalk(s:)], 25 April 1689, pp. 233-234.  Lijsbet(h) (c. 1659-1742/3) – later known as Elisabeth / Lijsbeth van de Caep & Lijsbeth Sanders, is born in slavery at the Cape (c. 1659).  She is the daughter (presumably by a black father Alexander) and the Guinea slave woman, Hoen / Hoena [also foundrecorded as Houwj or Houwi].  She is sister to Armozijn de Grote van de Caep.  Her mother had been purchased by the Cape’s 1st VOCcommander, Jan van Riebeeck.  After his departure (1662), Hoen/a & her heelslag foster daughter Lijsbeth Sanders: are sold, to Hendrik Hendricksz: BoomBoom later sells (6 January 1665) Hoen/a & her 2 daughters to the free-burgher Matthijs Coeijmans.  Lijsbet Sanders:, he sells (1671) to Baes ArrieAdriaen Willemsz: van Brakel (from s’-Hertogenbosch) & his wife Sara Jacobs: van Rosendael (from Amsterdam).  In terms of a Council of Policy resolution, Van Brakel sells Lijsbeth Sanders: to the free-black Louis van Bengale by whom she has 3 illegitimate daughters (Lijsbeth Louisz:, Anna Louisz: & Maria Louisz:).  She had been sold to Louis van Bengale as compensation for damages suffered resulting from her breaking into his home together with 2 sailors & stealing.  Louis frees (1682) her and her 2 children (Lijsbeth Louisz: & Willem Teerling) but has her prosecuted for desertion for breaching their contract of engagement. She ‘elopes’ with the father of her son, the Englishman, Willem Teerling [? Tarling as suggested by Susan Newton-King].  She is convicted for stealing jewelry and sentenced to be flogged & to do hard labour.  Thereafter, she shacks up with the German, Johann (Jan) Herbst (from Bremen).  She has 2 more daughters (Clara born Teerling / adopted Herbst & Gerbrecht Herbst).  Through her daughter Maria Louisz:, she is ancestor to the (in)famous Coenraad Buys and the Buys Basters [CA: MOOC 14/1/16 Bylae tot Boedelrekeninge, fol. 14, Lijsbeth Sanders: en Lijsbeth Lowise, 25 February 1738 – plus accompanying documents].

[15] She will be the subject of an impending separate article.

[16] The likelihood that Ansela van de Caep – recorded mother to the children that became known as Campher’s children – is not the same person as the exiled Baauw van Timor, I have never completely discounted as a possibility – even if only in terms of accessing the available recorded evidence. This likelihood – based on DNA testing revealing Haplogroup LOa1b2 – was previously brought to my attention by two individuals after my article on Pai Timor appeared on FFY.  Following a 3rd DNA query, I re-released my original response to the 1st two queries with the following quote (being the salient parts of my response to these two individuals at the time) as I think that it is still relevant. I added a proviso: I have been revisiting this conundrum again and again and I now have – I would like to believe – a more compelling explanation – also thanks to DNA testing appearing to conflict with my initial (now more seemingly likely incorrect) assumption that Baauw and Campher’s wife Ansela were indeed one and the same person …:  QUOTE ” … I have again looked at my unearthed data and revisited (yet again!) my article on Pai Timor. Although there is strong circumstantial evidence connecting Mrs Campher to Inabe (the unusual name Anthoinette interchanged with Angneta and Agnitie and Van Wijk’s business partner being Inabe’s de facto husband), at least seven things still concern / disturb me about Mrs Campher: 1. Her Company slave status – Pai Timor & family were clearly not enslaved even though the ambiguous wording of the initial letter of banishment implies possible enslavement if the colony (Mauritius & the Cape thereafter) was unable to utilise them as free people; 2. Her being recorded as van de Caep; 3. That her daughter Jacoba is clearly recorded as being castijs which would mean that she was halfslag – even though her sister Agnitie is recorded as being halfslag; 4. Her de facto [?] marriage with Campher; 5. That Agnitie Campher names her eldest daughter Anna (curiously also the name of Cornelis Campher’s voordochter); 6. If indeed not Baauw van Timor & if indeed Cape-born (and halfslag): why is there no recorded baptism?; 7. Why is there no record of her liberation and that of her children – if Company halfslag she would have had to wait until legal majority at 22 years of age and likewise her children – unless they were all collectively and prematurely purchased by an interested party? There were only two contemporary women named Ansela van de Caep and they both appear in the Opgaaf of 1695 which confirms that they were not one and the same person: Mrs Campher and Mrs Silberbach. Mrs Silberbach’s baptism and manumission are on record and we know that she was a privately owned slave. As for Mrs Campher, if we are to dismiss any un/likely Timorean descent, then I can already come up with a few suggestions to these worrying aspects listed above: 1. If indeed halfslag, she may have been baptised in 1663 as part of the ‘missing’ unnamed slave infants baptised collectively (see my article on FFY “What can’t be cured …”); 2. If indeed halfslag, her manumission (if meeting all the requisites) would not necessarily be recorded and she could well have even been married legally to Campher after liberation provided that she was indeed baptised; 3. Campher – if Lutheran – explains possibly a civil marriage which records are missing (see again my article on “What can’t be cured …” [see FFY]); 4. So far I am only aware of one contemporary heelslag slave woman named Anna and she was from Angola.  Given the DNA results thus far and my revisited reservations listed above, it seems to me that I cannot discount Anna or perhaps some other African slave as a likely mother to Mrs Campher … I trust that my latest musings are helpful. Certainly, again thanks to both your input, we may well be able to disprove my initial contention. I hope, that Mrs Campher – also a multiple ancestor of mine – will forgive me if have misallocated her …” UNQUOTE Rereading the above correspondence, it strikes me now that when recently reworking my research on the slave woman who belonged to Christoffel Snijman’s stepfather [Anthonij Jansz: van Bengale], there are equally compelling indications that Ansela could well be another [? foster] daughter of Anna van Guinea and ’sister’ to Maria Everts: van de Caep. I will be setting out my reasons for this in a forthcoming article about the Guinea slaves that came on the Hasselt. My limited understanding about haplogroupings – my research has been confined to trying to unravel as best I can the written record – is that LOa1b2 is also found in West Africa especially amongst the Balanta people: “Haplogroup L0a is most prevalent in South-East African populations (25% in Mozambique).[3] Among Guineans, it has a frequency between 1% and 5%, with the Balanta group showing increased frequency of about 11%. Haplogroup L0a has a Paleolithic time depth of about 33,000 years and likely reached Guinea between 10,000 and 4,000 years ago. It also is often seen in the Mbuti and Biaka-pygmies. L0a is found in almost 25% in Hadramawt (Yemen).[9]” [] [clicking on the link for Balanta is equally informative] Allow me to re-iterate what I wrote in the past. I trust that my latest-latest musings are further helpful.  Certainly – again thanks to more recent inputs – we may well be able to 
disprove my initial contention more conclusively. I sincerely hope, that Mrs Campher – also a multiple ancestor of mine – will forgive me if have mis-allocated her. There is another positive spin-off to this: finally – after so many many frustrating years dredging up the written record and getting to comprehend more fully the complexities and idiosyncrasies of 17th century colonial life and record-keeping – discovering that I, too, may now also be a multiple descendant of yet another formidable Founding Mother – Anna van Guinea – thrills me no end …

[17] Engelbertus Franciscus le Boucq (1675- Batavia 1748) – born Tubeke [Tubize]in Brabant, Spanish Netherlands [Belgium] husband to Susanna de Roo; a son Bastiana Theodora baptized Cape 20 May 1708 (witnesses: de H. Theodorus Sas & Mejuff: Sara de Roo, wed. Godart Terdion; de H. Louis Gerlagh & Mevrouw Margareta Trip, wed. Roelof Eelboo).  He and his wife witness the following baptism:  [9 September 1707] van Pieter Meyer en Alida de Savoije, onder getuijgen van Pred:[can]t Fransciscus Engelbertus de le Boucq [Engelbertus Franciscus le Boucq] en Susanna de Roo. – Maria Magdalena [Dictionary of South African Biography, vol. IV (Butterworth, Durban 1972), pp. 304-305].

[18] Jan Oberholzer / Oberholster / Overholster – originally Hans Oberholzer of Oberholz SG, born Aa near Wald ZH [CH, Staatsarchiv Zürich: Visitationen und Untersuchungen & HistorischBiographischer Lexikon der Schweiz Band V, pp. 322-323; Zürcher Kirchenbücher].  Baptised Goldingen (27 December 1680): parents listed as M: Joanes Oberholzer & Barbara Erbin & godparents as Melchior Hofman and Ana Maria Oberholzerin [Susan Anneveldt to FFY (15 January 2017)]. Arrives (c. 1696) aged only 16 in VOC employ listed as soldier but probably employed in butchery (until 1701) when contract ends [CA: MR (1696-1701)]; receives permission to settle as free-burgher; after abandoning Catholic faith admitted as member of Groote Kerk congregation & elected deacon; initially butcher & associated with Michiel Ley & others in meat contract which contributes to recall (1708) of Governor Willem Adriaan van der Stel [Kolbe 1719, p. 795];  buys (19 November 1706) house between Heere & Berg Dwars Street [CA: DO, T670 (19 January1706) from Abram van Dirksland & sold (1709) by T784 to Hendrik Oswald Eksteen (from Löbenstein in Thuringia)]; 6 months later marries Helena, daughter of Huguenot Guillaume du Toit [De Villiers, 1981, pp. 659-660] who owns several farms in Drakenstein & Stellenbosch districts & recently also buys farm Valley Lutry from Jan Margra (from  Lausanne); elected deacon of Drakenstein church clashing with Rev. Engelbertus Franciscus le Boucq – sent from Batavia but turning out to be a troublesome eccentric whose behaviour angers authorities so much that they send him back within a year – before marriage lives with a Eurafrican woman by whom he has at least 2 surviving children which Le Boucq uses to excommunicate him; institutes a civil court action, & despite this being unresolved at Le Boucq’s departure, is reinstated as deacon [CA: VC 17 Journal (18 December 1706); CJ 4. II, nos. 7,11 & 14 (1719)]; linked with free-born Agnitie Colyn & Company slave Christijn van Machteld Schmidt van de Caep whose respective illegitimate children Johannes (baptised 24 October 1702 (marrying Sara Coetsee) & [Johanna] Barbara (born later  marrying Paulus Hartog) appear to bear his parents’  names;  sells house (1709) house Table Valley moving to Stellenbosch taking over father-in-law’s farms Valley Lutry, Watergang & land adjoining Cloetesdal sold to Johannes Heyns (1715); within 1 year elected Heemraad [CA: 1/STB 15/2]; buys (1711) farm Nietvoorby near Klapmutsfrom Estate Westerkerke, Nietvoorby, 51,4 ha, “extending to the wild hills near Jan Viljoen (Nazareth) NE to E to the hills towards Stellenbosch, NW to the road to Stellenbosch; sold by T1384 (9 June 1721 to Hans Hendrik Hattingh [CA: DO, T874 (8 October1711)]; buys from Estate Guillaume du Toit (a) Valley Lutyu, 51,4 hectares, sold by T878 (27 October 1711) to Willem Bota [Botha]; (b) Stellenbosch farm Watergang, 24,8 hectares extending ENE to Dekkers Valley; (c) (Cloetesdal) Aan ‘t Pad, 53,1 hectares extending SW to Watergang & NW to Dekkers Valley – b & c sold by T1063 (23 November 1715) to Johannes Heyns [CA: DO, T823 (7 September 1710)]; granted (1712) adjoining land named Uitkyk [CA: DO, Grant OSF 1.121 (20 October 1712), the Stellenbosch farm Uitkyk, 51,8 ha., extending  SE to the wild hills toward Simonsberg, SW & SE to the wild hills & to Chris. Groenewald & others to Klapmuts, sold by T1362, 16 January 1721 to Abraham Coetzee] over which he holds a grazing licence [CA: RLR 3:10]; possessing farms at Stellenbosch & near Klapmuts on limits of Drakenstein District, member of mounted commandos both in Drakenstein at Stellenbosch  elected (1713) captain of former (1713) & latter (1715) [CA: 1/STB 13/21]; Burgher Roll (1712) listed with wife Helena, 2 sons, 6 male slaves, 11 horses, 81 head of cattle, 500 sheep, 18 000 vines & 16 leaguers of wine – in last growing season has sown/harvested 10/30 bags wheat & has 6 guns, a pistol & 2 swords; wife Helena by whom he has 2 sons & 1 daughter dies (1714); marries Judith du Plessis (born 1674 in Ireland), widow of Ary van Eeden [CA: A2250, Citizens Roll (1712) ]; obtains licence (1714) to graze animals “beyond 24 Rivers below small round Elschenbosch forest”, where Porterville now stands [CA: RLR 3:10 (15 August1714)]; sells Stellenbosch properties & apparently moves to his undeveloped farms near Klapmuts [CA: RLR 1:230 (3 May 1710) to graze above the corner of Klapmutsberg toward the Simonsberg]; for 1st & only time hires a soldier from Castle as a farmhand [CA: CJ 2877 (29 November 1714) ]; reports (1717) having no vines [CA: J 184, Citizens Roll (1717)]; 1719 lists 5 000 vines & 9 leaguers of wine [CA: A2250, Citizens Roll 1719]; he & wife draw up joint will (1718) [CA: MOOC 7/1/3:67]; dies (1721) aged about 41 years old; survived by 3 children: (1) Guillaume, baptised 4 December 1707 named after mother’s father; farmer with 40 000 vines; (2) Johannes, baptised 24 August 1710 probably named after father’s father, cattle & wheat farmer,  Zwartland; (3)  Johanna Barbara baptised 18 June 1713 probably named after father’s mother; she marries Michiel Pentz – progenitor of Pentz family at Cape.  [Vide Adolphe Linder, The Swiss in Southern Africa 1652-1970, (Baselr Afrika Bibliographien, Basel, 1997].

[19] Van der Spuy, Patricia:  ‘What, then, was the sexual outlet for black males?:  A Feminist critique of quantative representations of women slaves at the Cape of Good Hope in the Eighteenth century’, Kronos, no. 23 (University of the Western Cape, Bellville November 1996); Viljoen, Russel:  ‘”Till Murder do us part”:  The Story of Griet and Hendrik Eksteen’, South African Historical Journal, 33 (1995), pp. 13-32.

[20] A non-existent baptism has been ascribed to her – vide (accessed 12 October 2021) “Barbara gedoop 20 Apr 1708 (moeder Jannetjie Marretje VAN DE KAAP), X 30 Nov 1727 Paulus Hartog (sien ook wat Spoelstra, Vol I, p 81 te sê het)”.

[21] The subject of an impending separate article.

[22] The subject of an impending separate article.

[23] J. Leon Hattingh, J. Leon Hattingh, ‘Beleid en Praktyk: Die doop van slawekinders en die sluit van gemengde verhoudings aan die Kaap voor 1720’, Kronos, vol. 5 (1982), pp. 38-39.

[24] Jacob Pleunis / Plünes  – Eerw. diaken Jacob Pleunes (from Orsoy in the Duchy of Cleves).

[25] She is one the imported orphan girls shipped out to the Cape in 1688, Willemina Adriaensz: / Willemyntie Adriaansse de Wit (from Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland), the widow of Detlev Biebow aka Biebault (from Mecklenburg).

[26] On 26 September 1698 an unnamed slave infant was baptized with Jacob Pleunis and Willemijntie de Wit as witnesses.  The parents are recorded as Dirk van Anneke [?] and Lysbet van Malagasij.   One cannot but help wnder whether this incident amongst others, has anything to do with the deacon’s wife asking for a divorce in 1710?

[27] Mansell G. Upham, ‘A black sheep in the Coetzee family, Capensis, no. 3 (2001), pp. 47-48.

[28] For an investigation into his life, vide Gerald Groenewald, ‘An early modern entrepreneur: Hendrik Oostwald Eksteen and the creation of wealth in Dutch colonial Cape Town, 1702-1741’, Kronos, vol.  35 (2009).  This article, however, chiefly ignores Eksteen’s early personal slave involvement and ‘intersectionality’.  Heinrich Ostwald Eckstein / Hendrik Oostwald Eksteen (from Löbenstein in Thuringia) marries Cape (13 July 1704) Sara / Zara Heyns (1688-1713), voordogter (but later legitimised daughter) of Maria Schalks: by Pieter Heyns (from Leipzig); baptised 19 September 1688 [? baptism not found]; he marries (2ndly) Cape (21 January 1714) Everdina Cruywagen and marries (3rdly) Cape (19 February 1719) Alida van der HeydenEksteen also fathers an illegitimate son Hendrik by Maria Everts: baptised Cape (8 February 1705) and witnessed by the free-black Louis van Bengale. Eksteen also baptises a child by his wife in the same year named Michiel who is a legatee (and godchild) of the free-blacks Claas Cornelisz: and Beatrice van Cochin – the former being half-brother to his 1st wife’s mother Maria Schalk:

[29] Hans F. Heese, Reg en Onreg, p. 12; Patricia van der Spuy, ‘What, then, was the sexual outlet for black males?:  A Feminist critique of quantative representations of women slaves at the Cape of Good Hope in the Eighteenth century’, Kronos no. 23 (University of the Western Cape, Bellville November 1996); Russel Viljoen, ‘”Till Murder do us part”:  The Story of Griet and Hendrik Eksteen’, South African Historical Journal, 33 (1995), pp. 13-32.

[30] Hans F. Heese, Reg en Onreg, p. 12.

[31] Translated into Afrikaans by Mansell Upham from the English translation of I. Shapera, The Khoisan peoples of South Africa (George Routledge & Sons, Ltd., London 1930):

The Hymn of the Thunder

Son of the Thundercloud !

Thou brave, loud-speaking !Guru !

Talk softly, please,

For I have no guilt;

Let me alone ! (Forgive me !)

For I have become quite weak.

Thou, O,!Guru !

Son of the Thundercloud !

!Gurub di /Geis

!Nanumatse !

!Gari-khoi, !Gurutse !

†Ouse gobare,

/Havië t’am u-hà-tamaö;


†Outago Xuige.

!Gurutse !

/Nanus oatse !

[32] C.G. de Wet, Die Vryliede en Vryswartes in die Kaapse Nedersetting 1657-1707, p. 128.

[33] The reductionist categorories are derived from Bitterli.

[34] Dutch “brok”, “piece of”, e.g. of bread.

[35] In modern Dutch:  Kaross op zij – i.e. [move] your skins to the side…  Raven-Hart states that “Koros” (more correctly “Kul-karos”, derives from the words for “penis”  [sic – the word more likely derives from the French cul, ie bum, the word kul  is now used idiomatically in modern Dutch to mean rubbish  or nonsense – Editor] and “cloak”.  The word kaross [Afrikaans = karos ] appears to derive from the Khoe word caros and came to be used for any covering, blanket, cloak  made by the Cape aboriginals from skins.

[36] David Tappen (1682) vide  R. Raven-Hart, Cape Good Hope 1652-1702: The First 50 Years of Dutch Colonisation as seen by Callers (A.A. Balkema, Cape Town  1971).

[37] Brewer’s The Dictionary of Phrase and Fable states:  J. Bellenden Ker says the Dutch “Dit vor dat’” (this for that); “Quid pro quo.”  Heywood uses the phrase ‘Tat for tat,” perhaps the French phrase, “tant pour tant.”

[38] We know this to have been a term (also perjorative) used by Cape aboriginals when referring to (newly-arrived) Europeans.

[39] Jean O’Brien, Dispossession by degrees: Indian Land & Identity in Natick, 1650-1790 – Indian Land and Identity in Natick, Massachusetts, 1650-1790 (Cambridge University Press 1997).

[40] Urs Bitterli, Cultures in Conflict:  Encounters Between European and Non-European Cultures, 1492-1800 [Stanford University Press; 1st Edition (1 June 1993).

[41] Richard Elphick, Khoikhoi and the founding of White South Africa (Ravan Press: Johannesburg 1985).


14™ SESSION, JULY 1996



Madame Chairperson, Indigenous Participants, Ladies & Gentlemen

The GRIQUA NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA, under the Paramount Chieftaincy of His Excellency, Andrew Abraham Stockenström le Fleur II, is the legitimate representative body of the GRIQUA First Nation of South Africa which is currently, together with all the GRIQUA communities throughout South Africa and their respective leaders, in crucial negotiations with the Government of the Republic of South Africa for indigenous and First Nation status in accordance with universal and international legal and human rights practice.

It is already common knowledge in South Africa that the GRJQUA NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA has been instrumental in challenging the South African nation-state Government in terms of human rights to comply with international standards and indigenous peoples’ rights concerning the Khoisan First Nations who still find themselves as colonial victims confined within the artificial and colonially-induced borders of the nation-state of South Africa.

Following our initial participation at the 13th Session of the Working Group last year, we wish to report on major developments pertaining to our quest for human rights protection as indigenous people.

GRIQUA calls to the South African Government at the United Nations necessitated President Nelson Mandela’s personal visit to Griquatown and the symbolic laying of a wreath on ancestral and traditional lands of the GRIQUA on 24 September 1995. On this occasion President Mandela gave the personal assurance that the GRIQUA were entitled to equal treatment in terms of traditional leadership as provided for in the interim constitution.

On 10 October 1995 the indigenous KHOISAN leaders were invited by President Mandela to his official residence in Cape Town, Genadendal, where the President requested the KHOISAN leaders to consolidate their constitutional aspirations in terms of a Memorandum.

On 21 October 1995 leaders of all the GRIQUA communities met at Beaufort West to comply with the presidential request. Further negotiations followed thereafter with a meeting between the Minister of Land Affairs, Derick Hanekom and the same combined GRIQUA leadership.

On 6 December 1995 the GRIQUA NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA, in a protest note to the French Government called for the return of the remains of the so-called Hottentot Venus, the late Miss Saartje Baartman, whose skeleton and pickled brain and genitals remain stored and bottled in a backroom at the Musee de l’Homme in Paris. Notwithstanding subsequent undertakings by the South African Government to bring home these remains, the French Government has Pontius-Pilatised the whole issue claiming autonomy resides exclusively with the French scientific community, which autonomy is denied by the Museum in question.

On 14 December 1995, a combined GRIQUA delegation handed over a MEMORANDUM to President Mandela setting out comprehensively GRIQUA aspirations, constitutional and otherwise.

The Memorandum sets out the basis of GRIQUA self-determination. This involves :

* recognition of aboriginality
* representation at all levels of government
* traditional leadership-status
* the restitution of flagrantly violated treaties
* the return of all GRIQUA land usurped by colonial powers but now inherited illegally by the nation-state of South Africa and
* compensation for untold suffering, genocide and ethnocide inflicted on the GRIQUA and their KHOISAN ancestors as culturally, linguistically, socially, economically and politically deprived, disempowered and almost decimated aboriginal, autochthonous and indigenous people of southern Africa.

On 16 December the GRIQUA NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA hosted a youth conference in Bloemfontein, a city named after a famous GRIQUA leader, Jan Bloem.

On 23 January 1996 the GRIQUA NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA demanded the return of the remains and reburial of the GRIQUA chief Cornelis Kok II whose remains are currently boxed and shelved for more than 30 years at the Medical School of the University of Witwatersrand.

 On 5 March 1996 a copy of the Memorandum was submitted to the Constitutional Assembly and to President Mandela with the admonition that without any participation, consultation and endorsement by the First Nations, the so-called Final Constitution can never have any legitimacy. The GRIQUA have NEVER been consulted in any of the negotiations that have brought about the so-called New South Africa despite numerous representations by the GRIQUA.

On 23 March the EAST GRIQUALAND PIONEERS COUNCIL merged with the GRIQUA NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA for purposes of consolidating GRIQUA unity. An historic reunion of the two major GRIQUA communities took place after more than 100 years.

On 14 April 1996 the GRIQUA CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA participated together with other southern African KHOISAN indigenous groups from Botswana and Namibia at an historic, albeit tokenist, indigenous symposium – a first in the dismal history of that region.

On 19 June 1996 the GRIQUA NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOUTH AFRICA called on President Mandela to condemn Namibian President Sam Nujoma and his government for the illegal appropriation of the KHOISAN-descended Rehoboth Baster lands and the continuous violation of the indigenous and human rights of the Rehoboth Baster People.

Notwithstanding the above developments, and especially the submission of the Memorandum to President Mandela as long ago as 14 December 1995, the GRIQUA are outraged that the South African nation-state Government has failed thus far to accommodate satisfactorily the GRIQUA and their indigenous KHOISAN sisters and brothers within the self-proclaimed Human Rights-committed and self-styled New South Africa.

The GRIQUA have always been an inclusive people and a veritable Rainbow Nation. We regret to inform the Working Group that since our participation last year, the South African Government has failed to implement anything that might be construed to even attempt to address the deplorable and continuous marginalisation of the aboriginal people in the very land of their birth. We are still awaiting a reply from President Mandela. Our calls for endorsement of, and participation in, the International Decade have fallen on deaf ears. The deafening silence of the South African official delegation at both the 13th Session and this Session confirm our justified scepticism that our human rights will continue to be violated.

We again appeal to the United Nations and to President Mandela for urgent action to be taken so that we can take up our rightful place within the Rainbow Nation of the New South Africa. Only then can the final dismantling of official apartheid actually be realized.

Click to access 960307.pdf

“… A so-called Dutch gentleman …” – Adriaan Philippus Cloete (1795-1865)

… A so-called Dutch gentleman …”Adriaan Philippus Cloete (1795-1865)

by Mansell Upham

In the early Cape, there were only two Families worth considering! The one family was the Cloetes and the other, the van der Byls. According to their status, the Van der Byl’s ONLY spoke to the Cloetes and the Cloetes ONLY spoke to God!” 

From the folklore of the Cape of Good Hope
Cloete Family Coat of Arms

The public assault on the Cape of Good Hope’s pro-Abolitionists, the Scotland-born John Fairbairn (1794-1864) and his wife, Elizabeth (Eliza) Philip (1812-1840) by the anti-Abolitionist, the Cape-born Adriaan Philippus Cloete (1795-1865), like so many other ostensibly minor incidents in South Africa’s history, is always worth revisiting – especially from a micro-historical point of view   It is imperative to do so now that Slavery (as purportedly only practised by Europeans and their ‘white’ colonial descendants) is being weaponized as an overriding, zero-tolerant, perverted narrative by what is fast becoming conventionalised as Critical Race Theory (CRT), Wokism or Identity Politics.

John Fairbairn (1794-1864)

This public spectacle gives us a valuable glimpse of, as well as highlights, the complexities surrounding the peculiar nature of non-Atlantic slavery at the Cape, but also how deeply divided and conflicted Cape colonial society must have been at the time.

The Cape farmers, reliant for generations upon slave labour, were particularly disgruntled. Despite the fact that slaves were still to give four more years unpaid labour to their former masters before obtaining their freedom, many slave owners felt that their whole way of life was now threatened. Many heated meetings took place fuelling bitter feelings towards the proponents of the Emancipation movement in Cape Town.  

Homestead at Schoongezicht

One Cape farmer was unable to contain his wrath. Adriaan Philippus Cloete, who farmed at Schoongezicht in the Idas Valley at Stellenbosch, attacked John Fairbairn, a leading newspaper editor, philanthropist, and his wife, as they strolled peaceably down the Kaisersgracht – now St George’s Mall – on a summer evening in 1836.

Margaret Brodie Stewart by Alfred Edward Chalon (1829)

An affronted young Lady HershellMargaret Brodie Stewart (1810–1884) – 1st cousin as well as wife to Sir John Frederick William Herschel, 1st Baronet KH FRS 7 March 1792 – 11 May 1871), the Cape-based English polymath, mathematician, astronomer, chemist, inventor, experimental photographer, and botanist, wrote in a letter to her mother:

” … a so-called Dutch gentleman struck them repeated blows. A knot of these gentlemen had been railing at the door of their Club House when Mr and Mrs Fairbairn passed and this Cloete, unable to contain his rage, rushed out upon them, while the others made not one effort to withhold him or to defend the unfortunate couple. Their friends and supporters were incensed. Mrs Fairbairn, who is enceinte, left the field with a black eye and the doctors feared the worst consequences.”  

Cloete was arrested two weeks later and sentenced to 14 days imprisonment and a fine of 10 Pounds.

One wonders how Cloete’s conviction went down with Cape society in general, and with his family in particular.  Contrary to Lady Herchell’s discernible disdain for Cape Dutch ‘gentry’, the Cloetes were doubtless the colony’s oldest and most established family.

The son of Rudolph / Roedolph Cloete (1762-1816) and Johanna Catharina van Brakel, he was married (19 November 1817) to Maria Jacoba van Breda and the grandson of Hendrik Cloete Sr. (1725-1799) and Hester Anna Lourens of Groot Constantia-fame. 

Hendrik Cloete Sr. (1725-1799) with his slave attendant Augustus van Bengalen

His sister Johanna Catharina Cloete (1790-1843) was wife to none other than Colonel John Graham (24 April 1778-13 March 1821) – soldier notable for founding the city of  Grahamstown (1814).

Colonel John Graham (24 April 1778-13 March 1821)

His uncles were all prominent pillars of Cape colonial society.

Pieter Cloete (1756-1789) was ensign, surveyor (Court of Holland, Zeeland & West Friesland- admitted 22 May 1778) and military engineer who had studied at Utrecht University.

Hendrik Cloete Jr. (1758- 1818)

Hendrik Cloete Jr. (1758- 1818) was owner of Groot Constantia.

                Johan Gerard Cloete (1760-1805)

Captain Johan Gerard Cloete (1760-1805) was Commander of the Pandour Corps at the Battle of Muizenberg (7 August 1795).

Pieter Lourens / Laurence Cloete (1764-1837)

Pieter Lourens / Laurence Cloete (1764-1837) who joined the VOC and was the owner of Mount Pleasant on the slopes of Table Mountain and father to the following prominent Cape personages:

Adv. Henry Cloete (1792-1870)
  • Adv. Henry Cloete (1792-1870)

marries 2 April 1816 Helen-Christian Graham (1796-1816) from Sterlingshire, Scotland – sister to Col. Graham.

Sir Abraham Josias Cloete (1794-1886)
  • General Sir Abraham Josias CloeteFather of the British Army

1st Southern African to attain exalted rank of General-Officer in British military forces – commissioned in British Army during Napoleonic Wars and promoted Major-General (31 August 1855) and later full General (25 October 1871) having commanded the Windward and Leeward Islands in West indies (1856-1861); placed on retired list (1877).  Born at Cape Town (7 August 1794) of an illustrious Cape Colonial family. Attends Military college at Great Marlow and commissioned a cornet in the 15th Hussars (June 1809), aged 14 and 10 months! During military career serves with the 15th Hussars and 21st Light Dragoons in the United Kingdom (Burdett & Luddite riots, 1811), India (Mahratta War, 1817-1819), on Island of Tristan da Cunha, and at Cape of Good Hope (serving also as Aide-de-Camp to Governor, Lord Charles Somerset). At time of death (1886), he was Colonel of the 19th Regiment of Foot (Princess of Wales’s Own Yorkshire Regiment). He served in the British Army for over 60 years and was known as the Father of the British Army.  He married Anne Woolcombe.

  • Charlotta Johanna Cloete

She married (1stly) Lt. Col. Ronald Campbell and married (2ndly)  Sir Henry Rivers who having entered East India Company (1808) arrives at Cape Town (1816)  serving as Wharf-Master at  Simonstown (1819), magistrate in Albany (1821), commandant, Albany Levy (1822), magistrate at Swellendam (1825) with the new district of Riversdale being named after him (1838), treasurer of Cape Government (1842) and chairman of Green Point Municipality (1859).   Their daughter Catherine Maria Campbell married Sir Anthony Oliphant (1793–1859), British lawyer, Attorney-General at the Cape of Good Hope and 8th Chief Justice of Ceylon and their grandson was Laurence Oliphant (3 August 1829 – 23 December 1888).

Laurence Oliphant (3 August 1829 – 23 December 1888)

Born Cape Town and author, traveller, diplomat and Christian mystic, he was best known for his satirical novel Piccadilly (1870) and a Member of Parliament for Stirling Burghs.

John Fairbairn (1794-1864)

Isbrand Goske (1630 – 1691) – the Cape of Good Hope’s 1st VOC Governor (1671-1676)

Isbrand Goske (1630 – 1691) – Cape of Good Hope’s 1st VOC Governor (1671-1676)

by Mansell Upham

Contrary to popular belief, the 1st VOC governor at the Cape of Good Hope is not Simon van der Stel (1639-1712).  The ‘honour’, however, belongs to Isbrand Goske (1630 – 1691) who is appointed as such (13 October 1671).  He only takes up his position later, however, on his arrival (2 October 1672) at the colony serving as 1st governor (until 14 March 1676).[1] 

Goske, before taking up his appointed position as the colony’s very 1st governor, as a veteran VOC official, already stops over at the Cape of Good Hope on at least three significant occasions:

  • 17 March 1663 – post 6 April 1663
  • 17 August 1665 – 2 September 1665
  • 1 February 1671 – 24 February 1671

During his last three and a half weeks stay at the Cape, he makes several decisions concerning the fortification of the settlement and many recommendations about the colony’s administration in instructions which he leaves for Commander Pieter Hackius (post 1600-1671).  

Moodie summarises Goske’s recommendations as follows:[2]

1671. Feb.[ruary] 23.  Commissioner Isbrand Goske – subsequently the first Governor of the Cape – left behind him a Memorandum of this date, containing little directly relating to the natives, as he set out by stating his intention of touching on no subject adverted to by former Commissioners.  He ordered the formation of the “Positive orders”, a volume containing an alphabetical digest of all the instructions and orders issued since the foundation of the colony.  This had, as he states, been ordered by M[onseigneu]r. van Dam in 1667, but not completed with.  2d, – No new works or buildings to be undertaken without authority previously obtained.  3d., – To prevent the communication between Europeans and female slaves, – male and female slaves were to be united as man and wife, but not formally married, until baptized and instructed in their mutual obligations ; breach of both engagements were to be punished, with this difference, that those of married females should be punished according to law ; but the heathen at discretion, according to the nature of the offence ; Company’s slaves were to be forced to attend prayers ; children, the progeny of Europeans and slaves, of whom 12 were then at school, were to be taught, and particular care to be taken that they were not alienated, so as to remain in constant slavery, but that they might in due time enjoy the freedom to which, in the right of the father, they were born.  The free men’s debts to the Company were then f 7801.  The breeding of cattle, as the raising [of] corn, was deemed a loss to the Company, and the same opinion was expressed as to the gardens; but Mr. Goske ordered reference to be made to Europe, before leaving these things to the freemen.  The greater part of this paper is taken up with instructions relative to the expenditure, and the mode of keeping the accounts.  The paper concludes by the expression of a hope that the Company’s possessions may continue is a state of tranquility.”

Following Commander Pieter Hackius’s death and the appointment of Governor IJsbrand Goske as his successor, there follows an awkward interregnum in the colonial administration of the Cape of Good Hope.  This lasts for 10 months.  The colony had been placed under the provisional administration of Daniel Froymanteau[3], assisted by the aristocrat Conrad von Breitenbach[4], Joan Coon[5] and the ever-present Hendrik Crudop[6]. The provisional administration lasts four months until the arrival (23 March 1672) of the newly appointed secunde, Albert van Breugel[7].  The interregnum lasts for another dramatic six months (until 2 October 1672) when Goske finally assumes office as the Cape’s 1st governor.

The 1st treaty the Dutch make with the natives of the Cape of Good Hope – and also drawn up by the Dutch – is signed and sealed (19 April 1672).  The treaty is negotiated at the instigation of the visiting VOC Commissioner Aernout van Overbeke (1632-1674)[8] who leaves the Cape (22 April 1672) for Patria (the Netherlands).  This treaty provides for the sale of the Cape territory also referred to as Cabo de Boa Esperance.  This historic event is not recorded in the Company Journal.  In his despatch sent to the Heeren XVII, Van Breugel makes no mention whatsoever of the treaty.

VOC Commissioner Aernout van Overbeke (1632-1674)

Only one year later is the original treaty (together with the 2nd treaty) forwarded by Governor IJsbrand Goske

Goske is under the (mistaken?) impression that the existence of both treaties had already been made known to the Heeren XVII already in Van Breugel’s despatch (19 April 1672) but in all likelihood the ‘omission’ is due to the accumulative and disruptive events leading up the protracted 2nd Khoe-Dutch War (1673-1676), so-called.[9]

For more detailed background on the two treaties, click at the following link:


Goske’s important impact on the Cape of Good Hope has never yet been sufficiently appreciated.  Not only is he involved in the original planning of the Casteel de Goede Hoop, but he also gets to further oversee and ensure the Castle’s eventual completion. 

Casteel de Goede Hoop

His introduction of special measures to ensure the right to (eventual) freedom of Cape-born slaves of European or White parentage has a direct bearing on the peculiarly complex racial stratification of what later becomes the nation-state of South Africa. 

His intolerance of corruption appears to be borne out by the dramatic prosecutions of at least three high-ranking VOC officials serving at the Cape of Good Hope.  All four are later rehabilitated with two of them becoming notorious acolytes to the later Van der Stel gubernatorial dynasty:

1673:                           Joannes Wittebol[10]

15 September 1674:    Cornelis Petersen Linnes[11]

2 March 1675:             Johann (Johannes) Phijffer[12]

26 April 1675:             Albert van Breughel Sr.

Finally, he is also the person who authorizes the Christian burial of the in/famous baptized Cape indigene Eva Meerhoff, born Krotoa of the Goringhaicona[13] which is best understood and contextualized against the background of his direct involvement in the 2nd Khoe-Dutch War (1673-1676) which protracted war of attrition has yet to be more fully interrogated. 

According to Ten Rhyne, the appropriation of Hottentot body parts as amulets or trophies is also known to have taken place with Goske singled out as an example:[14]

“What is more, the Governor [Goske], whose word can absolutely be relied upon, added the following:  ‘I too owned a remarkable stone.  It was cut from the middle of a man’s testicle, and, on account of its diamond-like brilliance I had it set in a ring.  But I made a present of it to the King of the negroes, a superstitious fellow, who displayed a profound belief in its power as an amulet’”.

IJsbrand / Isbrand / Usbrand Godske / Godsken / Goske (c. 1626 – after 1689) – 1st Governor of the Dutch Colony – artist’s impression

IJsbrand / Isbrand / Usbrand Godske / Godsken / Goske (c. 1626 – after 1689) – 1st Governor of the Dutch Colony

After the death (30 November 1671) of the Cape’s Commander Pieter Hackius, Godske is appointed to succeed him with the title of Governor and Councillor Extraordinary of India.

For the time it takes him to arrive at the Cape, first the Political Council under an administrateur Daniel Froymanteau, and then the secunde, Albert van Breugel (23 March 1672 – 2 October 1672), act as the colony’s ‘governor’.

He is the eldest son of Johan Goske of Holstein, an armourer to the Prince of Orange, and his wife Aefgen IJsbrants: of The Hague.

In November 1654, he holds the rank of VOC merchant and participates in the VOC’s mission to the King of Kandy, in Ceylon.


He commands the important VOC office at Galle, Ceylon (1656-1661).

He leaves the Company’s service (1661), but nevertheless takes part in the conquest of Cochin [Kochi on the Indian sub-continent’s Malabar Coast] under Rijckloff van Goens Sr. (1619-1682) and only returns to Patria (the Netherlands) in November 1662 [not September as stated in Wikipedia].  

He also distinguishes himself as a soldier in the sieges of Colombo and Mannar Island.

In March 1665 [not 1665 as stated in Wikipedia], he leaves again for the East Indies and while at the Cape of Good Hope (1665), recommends a suitable site for the new castle which is to replace the existing Fort de Goede Hoop.

Two days after his arrival at Batavia [Jakarts on Java, Indonesia], he is appointed (11 November 1665) commander of Dutch Malabar and becomes director (1 September 1668) of the VOC factory at Gamron in Persia [Iran], a position he holds (until 1670).


As commander of the return fleet he arrives again (1671) at the Cape as VOC commissioner.

This experience leads to his appointment (October 1672) as 1st Governor of the Cape of Good Hope.

During his tenure, the Castle is finished and the Hottentots-Holland district is opened on the western edge of settled lands with its own cattle station.

He also wages early battles in the Khoekhoe-Dutch Wars with the raiding Khoekhoe chieftain Gonnema of the Cochoqua.

He serves for four years and establishes (1674) the Orphan Chamber (Weescamer) as judicial body overseeing the administration of deceased estates and orphaned minor children.

He is sent to preserve the peace at the time of 3rd Anglo-Dutch War.

Needed in the Netherlands after the war’s end, he returns there in 1676.

Chronology: Isbrand / Isbrant / IJsbrand / IJsbrant / Ysbrant Godske / Godsken / Goske / Gosken / Gotske (1630-1691) [signs as Isbrand Goske] – 1st governor of the Cape of Good Hope)

1630:                           born at The Hague

son of:

Jan van Gotske (1600-1662) from Danish Holsten [Holstein] & Aeffgen IYsbrants: (from The Hague)

grandson of:

 IJsbrant NN (born 1575) & Trijn Claesdr: Kuijten

serves in Batavia

November 1654:         VOC merchant & member of VOC delegation to King of Kandy

1656-1661:                  commander of Galle on Ceylon [Sri Lanka]

1661:                           leaves Company’s service but rejoins to take part in conquest of Cochin under Rijckloff van Goens (1619-1682) distinguishing himself as a soldier in Siege of Colombo & Siege of Mannar.

2 November 1662:      repatriates ex Batavia on De Jonge Prins & stops at Cape of Good Hope (17 March 1663- post 6 April 1663)

17 March 1663:          Return Fleet under Herman Klenke van Odessen arrives.

  • Amersfoort
  • Wapen van Amsterdam
  • Slot van Honingen
  • Wassende Maan
  • Parel
  • Jonge Prins
  • Walecheren &
  • Hof van Holland

2 April 1663:                           “April 2nd . – [1663] … This morning

  • Mr Winnincx,
  • Jan van Ryck, &
  • Commander Godtsken

went on board, taking with them some children, who had hitherto remained on shore until the return fleet would be ready to leave.

At the same time several married couples who had been boarding among the burghers, & were passengers on the return ships, came to say farewell, in order to proceed on board in this fine weather …”

6 April 1663: witnesses baptism of the infant named Virena Klinck

Denselfden d[it]o [April Anno 1663, den 6en d[it]o] heeft Dom[in]e de Metre aen boort gedoopt, het kint van den E.[dele]H[ee]r Admirael Herman Klincke, ende is genaemt Virena; de ghetuigen sijn d’E[dele] H[ee]r Vice-Admirael Leonard Winnincx, en d’E[dele] H[ee]r Gijsbrant Goske, voor d’E[dele] H[ee]r Coenraet Klincke, en juffvrouw Susanna van de Couter, en Juffvrou Maria Trompers. Godt de Heere geeft dat dit ghedoopte kint tot sijns naems eere mach opwassen.

post 6 April 1663:               departs ex Cabo for Patria

17 August 1665:         en route again to Batavia, stops over on Nieuw Middelburgh at the Cape as VOC commissioner (17 August 1665-2 September 1665)

23 August 1665:         witnesses (with Maria aux Brebis, wife of the Cape’s 2nd incumbent commander Zacharias Wagenaer) baptism of Henriette Lacus, daughter of Hendrik Lacus (from Wesel) & Lydia de Pape

1665:                           selects new site for the Casteel de Goede Hoop 

2 September 1665:      departs ex Cabo  

9 November 1665:      arrives in Batavia       

11 November 1665:    appointed commander of Malabar – departs ex Batavia for Malakka with cargo from Japan:

“cargasoen f 1.376.066.7.7 uit Japan”

4 December 1665:       arrives at Malakka (departs 12 December) with 10 ships:

“carg. f 1. 662.166.10.6 van daar, namelijk

  • vier voor Coromandel f 746.441.-.1
  • drie voor Bengalen f 620.467.5.8
  • één voor Surath f 165.532.18.12
  • één voor Perzië f
  • voorts voor Ceylon f 42.754.7.14 &
  • Wingurla f 33.909.18.6

(De bezending naar UdJung Selang had weinig succes)”

1665-1667:                  commander of Cochin (1665-1667)

1 September 1668:      director of Persia [Iran] (1668-1670) stationed at Gamron

April 1670:                  departs ex Gamron in Persia [Iran] repatriating for a 2nd time & sails (19 November 1670) as admiral of Return Fleet ex Batavia visiting the Cape as VOC commissioner (1 February 1671 – 24 February 1671)

Return Fleet of 8 ships, brings (1 February 1671) Hon. Isbrand Goske, lately Director in Persia & now commanding this fleet, being

  • Sticht van Utrecht
  • Middelburg
  • Vrye See
  • Wapen van Hoorn
  • Gerechtigheyt &
  • Prins Willem

all sailing from Batavia (20 November 1670) together with little flute

  • Bunschoten

orders (23 February 1671)

  • formation of Positive Orders
  • re-inforces ban on communication between Europeans & female slaves by encouraging de facto marriages between slave couples  &
  • makes provisions for education & Christianization of children born of slave mothers & European fathers

promises manumission for:

  • Louis van Bengale – former slave of:
    • (1stly) Zacharias Wagenaer (from Dresden) &
    • (2ndly) Hendrik Lacus (from Wesel, Duchy of Cleves)

24 February 1671:       embarks & departs ex Cabo (24 February 1671)

13 October 1671:        appointed Raad Extraordinaris & governor at the Cape

30 April 1672:             finally departs for Cape of Good Hope

2 October 1672:          arrives on Zuyd Polsbroek at Cape – wife [not yet identified] dies en route 

Cape’s 1st governor (appointed 13 October 1671 / commencing 2 October 1672-13 March 1676)

2 October 1672: Sunday. Vessel in sight. After the morning service M[onsigneu]r. Van Breugel and some Councillors proceeded to the back of the Lion Mountain to have a good look at her. On his return he ordered the open boat to be filled with vegetables and sheep as refreshments for the new arrival, which, however, in consequence of a S. E. breeze which had sprung up, was unable to reach the roadstead. The Fiscal was accordingly sent on board, and from a preconcerted signal (the firing of a few guns), we were informed that she was the Zuijd Polsbroeck, having on board Governor Godske and the family of Sieur Breugel, which caused great joy, and as the S. Easter had subsided a little, His Honour and two Councillors proceeded on board. Shortly afterwards, however, the wind once more commenced to blow furiously, so that there was no chance of landing, and accordingly the soldiers and the burghers, who had been under arms, were dismissed towards evening. At 10 o’clock, however, some guns were fired by the Saxenburgh, and an hour later two sloops reached the jetty, contrary to expectation bringing with them on shore the Governor and the Secretary. During a temporary calm, they had left the Zuijd Polsbroeck and safely reached the land. The vessel had left Amsterdam on 30 April last, and had called nowhere. She had lost 18 men and brought 60 sick [Company Journal].

3 October 1672: The Governor orders the quartermaster of de Bruydegom to take on board a quantity of water and refreshments for the Zuijd Polsbroek, which had on account of the wind retired to Robben Island. He also took a written order to the Superintendent on the Island to provide the ship daily, as long as she remained there, with refreshments and sheep. Afterwards the Governor went to inspect the new Castle. In the meanwhile the merchant, Sieur Breugel and the councillors who had accompanied him had left the vessel, and after a long and difficult row, finally landed behind the Lion Mountain, and afterwards reached the Fort, so that the number of the Council is once more complete. In the evening the Governor was present for the first time at the Council Board, and after having briefly explained the character of his office, and why he had been sent hither by the Directors, he was once more welcomed, and promised the respect and obedience of all the members, with the wish that he might have a happy administration. Thereupon he ordered that on Wednesday next, all the burghers were to be summoned to a general meeting in order to appear under arms together with the military, and be present at his induction [Company Journal].

Establishment of buitenpost at the Hottentots-Holland

1673-1676                   Moordkuil Massacres & 2nd Khoe-Dutch War

1674:                           Establishment of Weescamer (Orphan Chamber’)                           

24 July 1674:               drowning of 3 convicted sodomites

29 July 1674:               death of Eva Meerhoff (c. 1643-1674)

30 July 1674:               burial of Eva Meerhoff (c. 1643-1674)

September 1674:         Cornelis Petersen Linnes (from Christiania [Oslo], Norway) – prosecuted

2 March 1675:             Johann (Johannes) Phijffer (from Frankfurt am Main) – prosecuted

26 April 1675:             Albert van Breugel – prosecuted

30 June 1675: witnesses baptism of Cape-born infant Laurens Alexander Pietersz:

Den 30 dito [(Junij) ] een soontie van Arnoldus Pietersz: onderkoopman op het ter zee leggende schip d’Alexander en sijn huijsvrouw Anna de Langhe het kint wierdt genaamt Laurens Alexander als getuijghen werden in plaats van E.[dele] heer Laurens Pietersz: Ordinaris Raad van India Johannes Gravius en d’E.[dele] heer Gouverneur Isbrandt Goske.

1 September 1675: witnesses baptism of Cape-born infant Hendrick Crudop Jr.

Den 1 Septemb:[e]r een soontie van S[ieu]r Hendrick Crudop en Juffr:[ouw] Catharina de Vooght de naam was Hendrick ‘t getuyheniss wierd waerden bij d’E.[dele] heer Gouverneur Ijsbrandt Goske en Juffr:[ouw] Anna van der Meer wed:[uw]e wijlen de predikant Adrianus de Vooght

11 November 1675:    sells slaves to the free-burgher Cornelis Stevensz: Botma for Rds 270:

  • Anthonij,
  • Carel &
  • Alexander

sells (1675) the slave:

  • Louis van Nagapatnam

to free-burger Theunis Dircx: van Schalckwijck on condition that he liberate him after 8 years’ service – freed (5 October 1683) [Transporten en Schepenkennis].

18 March 1676:           departs for Patria – vice-commander of Return Fleet under Nicolaes Verburgh (dies 1676) – reprimanded for not stopping at Ascencion & not interfering with French ships there but later awarded gold chain by VOC for distinguished service

29 September 1691:    dies (aged 61) & buried at The Hague


[1] Claims on Wikipedia that his predecessor Pieter Hackius (post 1600-1671) had been appointed governor on 2 June 1670 [sic], are unfounded.  Hackius, it should be noted, dies on 30 November 1671) as commander.

[2] Donald Moodie in The Record or a Series of the Official papers relative to the Conditions and Treatment of the Native Tribes of South Africa (A.A. Balkema, Cape Town 1959).

[3] Magister [jurist] Daniel Fromanteau / Froymanteau / Froijmanteau from Leiden.  Arrives (24 May 1671) on Het Wapen van Zierikzee (24 May 1671); takes charge of Company’s stoves and depots (21 July 1671): “Fairly good weather with a N. breeze. The stores and depots which had hitherto, after the escape ofthe merchant De Cretzer, been under nobody’s control except that of some commissioners, were to-day entrusted to the merchant Froymanteau, who shall henceforth have the charge of them” [Company Journal]; as provisional administrator (administrateur) heads the provisional administration following the death (30 November / 1 December 1671) of Cape Commander Pieter Hackius (post 1600-1671); dies at the Cape (12 April 1672): “… This night the Junior Merchant, Daniel Troymanteau [sic], who arrived here in the Zierikzee, & in consequence of the misfortune of Cornelis de Cretzer [as incumbent fiscal stowed away after a stabbing incident], had been kept here by the late Commander Hackius, after a few days illness died in the flower of his life. He had been acting as provisional Commander (since the death of Mr. Hackius), but after his death matters were found to be in great confusion, & the books quite white (not written up), so that we shall have our hands full again … [Company Journal]; buried (12 April 1672) – day before when 1st treaty with Cape indigenes is signed).  His surviving inventory [Deeds Office (DO) & Cape Archives (CA): Transporten en Schepenkennis, 1671-1672, vol. V – transcription by Anna J. Böeseken & Margaret Cairns] itemizing his library, underwear, sewing materials, female items … Ses dosijn naeij ringen … Vier duijschent naeij naelden … Achthien douzijn ringerhaelen … makes for fascinating reading …

Inventaris van d’goederen en naergelatenschap

 van den onder coopman Daniel Fromanteau,

van Leijden geweesen provisioneel administrat:e[u]r alhier,

sodanig als d’selve op den 12[d]e April jongstleven,

 metter doot heeft ontruijmt en naergelaten, te weten

Twee p:[ae]r fijne swarte vigonie hoede

Twe p:[ae]r d:[it]o grauwe

Thien dousijn caerten

Een doosje met vier vercickde boucquetjes

Seven p:[ae]r slegte neusdoecken

Een p:[ae]r oranglams gestreepte jacque

Vier slegte dasjes

Een pack manschetten met kant

Een vrijdt mantel van parralaen

Een pack swarte greijne cleken met linten

Een swarte fulps rock geendeckt met goudt dragdige knopen

Een bruijne rock van sarge de dames met dick gelijcken knopen

Een oude bruijne lakens rock

Een oude Spaensche rockje van sarge des dames

Twee paer halftleeren sarjette cousen

Twee paer d:[it]o spaens leere schoenen

Een geshreepte cam kosser

Een capj fulp van ongeveert 3/4 ell

Een deegen van massijv silver draecmete

Een portospe met silvere fraujen

Geweld: een swarte draagbant van sargie

Een pack pistolen

Een Spaensche bijbel in folie

D’Comp:a een Duitche d:[it]o

Twee speelboecktjes

Peckius van Handt Opleggen en besetten

Arithmetica van Ant:[honi]e Smijters

Regterscheijt van d’ Wet en der Propheten

Ars Notariatus

Een cleerborstel met schildtpadt ingeleijt

Een oudt gestreept ondercleedt

Cabeljouws Memorie Boeck

Secretaire a la mode

Twe Fransche Grammatica

D[it]o Dictionarium

Nieuwe Papegaij

Hollantse Regtgeleertheijt

Drie deel van d’ Consullatien

Practijcq van Zutphen

Taffin van Coopman Roer


Een Fransche akas

Een Spaensche grammatica

Een Comedie Boeck

Een Testament en Salemboek

Catechisatie van Petrus de Wit

Transformatie van Ovidius

Maxius Curtius in ‘t Spaens

Lamendement de Vie


Practicq der Notarius van Leeuwen

Jan Batt:[avi]a Houwke

Tijdtcorting van Ridder

Een groot kist en slot

Twee dasjes met kanteen dosijn slegte leffen

Noch drie d:[it]o

Vijffthien pack paaftjes

Vier vaderlantse slegte hemden

Drie d:[it]o slaaplakens

Vijff st[uc]x vaderlantse servetten

Een nieuwe een

Een oude onderbroecken

Een alamode beff met d:[it]o kant

Eenige oude servetten

Een cleijn oorkussentje

Vijff ell gumpe kanten ongevaer

Een vergoude coper deegen

Een perler couleur seijde cousch

Een groote spiegel met een ebbehoute zijst

Een bleuwerante sijde vrouws rock met hemden hanten

Vier packe leere handtschoenen

Elff cleijn sijde incammer moer

Enige endtjes silver en goudt gallon

Een pack oud cousen en van saijet

Een silvere steltjel van lindt ‘t hoort

Een scheerdoeck van fijne moeris

Gemeene linnen hand doeck

Een oudt Spaens wambas van goude meer

Een oude blauwe scherpe

Een mes en een forck

Vijff stucx schile lint

Vier brieven spelden

Ses dosijn naeij ringen

Vier duijschent naeij naelden

Een dousijn grote scharch

Een d:[it]o cleijner

Noch twee dousijn schaeren

Negen paer leffaekers segge negen

Drie paer craele d:[it]os

Vijff en veertige douzijn verseilverde tinne

Achthien douzijn vrouwe ringerhaeden

Seeven en dertigh dousijn slegte aekers aan neusdoecken

                Een ell 1/2

Een pack schoenesen

Een vrouws tabaer van portuvenige

Een d:[it]o van traille kant

Een d:[it]o d[it]o met opgemaeckt

Twee lapjes witte smaele kant ijder omtrent 6 ell lanck

Een d:[it]o breedten 2/14 ell lank

Een kasje met rommelingh

Twintigh Rijxd:[ae]l[der]s en elk quart en seven quart

Twee Rijxd:[ae]l[der]s aan Fransche munt

Ses kopstukken aan engelt goedt

Twee pack grote silvere knopen en vierde d:[it]o vlessen

Neegen volle kelders met brandewijn

Aldus g’inventarisseert ind’ Fortresse d’ Goede Hoop desen 4[d]e Octob:[er] 1672 ten overstaen van d’naer genoemde gecommitt:[eerde]s aen de soldij boecke houder als curateur ad lites

Ons present als gecommitt:[eerde]s

[signed] J.[oan] Coon

[signed] J[oannes] Prætorius

Bij mij

[signed] H.[endrick] Crudop

[signed] W.[illem] van Dieden

[4] Johann Conrad von Bredenbagh / Breitenbach / Breytenbach aka Coenraad Orbanus / Urbanus from Altenburgh [Altenbruch]& Coenraet van Altenberch from Meissen in the Electorate of Saxony or Foxchaen [? Cuxhaven in Lower Saxony] – hesigns his name as Conrad von Altenburg aus Meissen].  German aristocrat from the Palatinate, he arrives (5 March 1671) at the Cape on the Gecroonde Vrede with his wife Anna Maria Roerscheg / Roersche(y) / Roorschy.  Captain and head of the Cape garrison (1671-1673). They witness (26 June 1672) the baptism of Anna Sophia Bosch, the daughter of Dirk Bosch (from Amsterdam) and Geertruida Mentinghs: (from Hasselt).  Johann Christian Hoffmann, stopping over at the Cape (11 February 1672 – 8 May 1672) before taking up his new position as teacher on Mauritius, observes Breytenbach act as Cape commander following the death of Pieter Hackius, and mentions him as follows: … “After the death a few days previously of Commandeur Hackij [Hackius] the Hon. Conrad von Breytenbach, a German nobleman and like myself from the Pfaltz, was in command here for His Serene Highness the Prince of Orange, in the name of the States-General and by the orders of the Lords Proprietors. He now richly provided us with everything, oxen, African sheep (which have no wool but hair, and carry such fat tails that one often weighs more than 15 pounds), also with cabbages, turnips, lettuce, rosemary, parsley and such garden -fruits. I made my way ashore, somewhat to stretch my legs which I had not been able to do for a considerable time, as also to regard the nature of the country and its beauties. Nothing was so insignificant, no plant so small, that it was not worthy of my special attention: indeed everything seemed a marvel to my eyes, since even the smallest things were unknown to me. In a word, I found myself in a new world; and at the same time enjoyed unusual favours from the [acting] Governor, since he not only regarded me as a fellow-countryman but also brought me ashore from the ship for my greater advancement” [Johann Christian Hoffmann, Oost-Indianische Voyage (Cassel 1683 and reprinted The Hague 1931 – with some notes by Naber – and quoted in Major Raven-Hart’s Cape Good Hope]. Since the ineffectual and prematurely deceased Magister Daniel Froymanteau (from Leiden) had been formally appointed the colony’s interim administrator, it may well be that, Breytenbach effectively also takes over as de facto acting commander of the colony. Thereafter, he is appointed (29 April 1673) administrator of the new but ill-fated Dutch colony on St Helena. Together with Johannes Coon, he departs (1 May 1673) on the Frans Europa. Granted permission to depart with family to settle on Ceylon or in Batavia as a free-burgher: “22 October 1674: With one of these departing ships (the Betuwe) our Fiscal, Magister Pieter de Neijn, leaves for Batavia. The ex-Captain Coenraedt van Bredenbagh also leaves with his family. He has been permitted by the Directors to settle as a freeman either at Ceylon or Batavia” [Company Journal].

[5] Lieutenant Johannes (Joan / Johan) Coon / Coonen / Coone / Coons: / Koon from Sommelsdijk, Zuid-Holland in the Netherlands.  Prior to transfer to the Cape, serves already 8 years in the Indies; succeeds Pieter Evraerts: van Cruijssaert; 1664: arrives at the Cape with his wife Alexandrine / Alexandrina (Sandrina) Jacobs: Maxvelt / Maxwell – better known as Juffrouw Coonon board the Walcheren [Anna J. Boeseken, Wagenaer’s Journal, p. 153; this Journal entry has been overlooked by Margaret Cairns in her article, ‘Alexandrina Maxwell: Juffrouw Coon, her second marriage’, Familia, pp. 54-56]; she witnesses (25 April 1666) baptism of Elisabeth Louisa (daughter of Joannes de Nyssen & Catharina Herbert, who are returning to the Fatherland); she witnesses (7 November 1666) – with Leendert de Klerck, Joan van As (from Brussels, Brabant) & Maryke Tielemans: [Maijcke Hendricks: van den Berg (from Diest, Brabant) – she witnesses (7 November 1666) the baptism of Anna (daughter of Matthijs Coeijmans (from Herentals) and Catharijn de Klerck): den November een dochter van Matthys Koymans en Cathrijn [sic] syn huysvrouw wiert genaemt Anna de getuygen waren Leendert de Klerck, Joan van As, Juff.[rouw] Coon en Mayke Tielemans:; 15 March 1669:  Joannes Coon van Somesdijck [sic – Sommelsdijk, Zuid-Holland] voor zergeant anno 1664 met 20 gul.[den] ter maant met ‘t schip Walcheren hier te lande gekomen, ende in den jare 1665 door den E. Heer Commissaris Pieter de Bitter, tot absolijt vaandrager, met 36 gul.[den] ter maant gepromoveert, Soo wert den selven op sijn schriftelijck versoeck de wijle sijn dienst tot genoege van sijn gebiedent hooft heeft waargenomen, de chargie van provisioneel lieutenant, en 40 gul.[den] ter maant onder een drie jarich verbant toegevoecht, qualiteijt en gagie na ‘t uijtloopen sijns verbonden tyt aanvanck nemende;  she appears (1676) as a Cape congregation member  listed as Sandrina Jacobs:, huisvrouw van Joannes Coon [CA: VC 603: (Lidmaatregister)];  his death at St Helena (3 February 1673) is referred to in a Despatch (10 May 1673) [CA: C 496, Deel II, p. 576];  she  marries (2ndly) at Cape (29 September 1679) Louis / Lodewyck Francois B(o)ureau (from Brussels), locally known as Lodewyk Francen, a nickname which he greatly deplores according to Hendrik van Reede tot Drakenstein in his Journaal van Zijn Verblijf aan de Kaap; born (c. 1649), he is the son of Carel Burouw, an advocate in Brussels; after military service in Europe, he joins the VOC serving at Cape as soldier, clerk and finally victualler in which position of trust he falls foul of the law; charged with theft he is dismissed from service for life and deported to Netherlands; his deportation order, however, is initially not carried out and he becomes a free-burgher at Cape; Commissioner Van Rheede appears to refuse to condone laxity of his former protectors Ryklof van Goens the Elder and Ryklof van Goens the Younger. Alexandrina Maxvel appears alone in Muster Roll (1682).  Juffrou Koon witnesses (29 August 1683) the baptisms of Jacob (son of her mesties slave Maria Lossee / Lozee [daughter of Maria van Angola]) and Lysbet (daughter of her mesties slave Anna Pieters: [van Batavia]); she appears (1684) as Alexandrina Buro and she appears (1685) with Lodewyk Breureau as Alexandrina Maxwal; it is not known whether she accompanies her 2nd husband once he is finally deported.  She appears to have no children.

[6] Hinrich (Hendrik) Crudop (1646-1691) from Bremen.  Born (c. 1646); son of Hinrich Krutop and Ilsabe Grothus; arrives (11 February 1668) on d’Amiata [Damiate]; 11 March 1669: hofmeester (1669) – Hendrick Cruijdop van Breemen voor adelborst met 10 gul.[den] per maant, met ‘et schip d’Amiata a[nn]o. 1668 hier g’arriveert, en dewijle hij zedert dien tijt de plaats van hoffmeester met sonderling vlijticheijt en groot genoegen van de E.[dele] Command[eu]r. deser residentie heeft becleet, soo wert bij deser, op sijn versoeck in die functie met 20 gul. ‘s mts. bevesticht, des altijt gehouden wesende sijn diensten aan de pen wanneer daartoe gecommandeert wort, te moeten presteren, en voorts verplicht sijn verbonden tijt daar voor uijt te dienen; secretary of Council of Policy; cashier (1671); 1st president of Orphan Chamber (1674); director of Company’s store (1675); promoted to rank of merchant and appointed secunde (1676); acting Cape commander (29 June 1678 – 12 October 1679) after death of Governor Johan / Joan Bax van Herentals / Herenthals (‘s-Hertogenbosch 14 March 1637 – Cape Town 29 June 1678); transferred to Batavia (1680); dies Ambon 1691; marries at Cape (8 November 1671) Catharina de Vooght (from Amsterdam); sister to Cape’s resident minister Adriaen de Voogd; they have the following children: (1) Hendrik baptised (Cape 11 September 1672 – dies in infancy; (2) Hendrik baptised (Cape 1 September 1675); (3) Johan Adriaan baptised (Cape 7 May 1680) – youngest son remains at the Cape, enters Company’s service but goes to Batavia (1695) and still found in Muster Rolls there (1720).  

[7] Albert van Breugel Sr. – acting VOC commander at Cape of Good Hope (since arrival 23 March 1672) from Ceylon [Sri Lanka] on Macassar (until 2 October 1672) when IJsbrand Goske (appointed 13 October 1671) finally takes up position as the Cape’s 1st governor. At the Cape with his wife and daughter: Joanna Leenders: huysvr:[ouw] van den koopman Albert van Breugel, Elisabeth Leenders: jonged:[ochte]r [Ledematen Register]. Succeeds Magister Daniel Froymanteu (from Leiden) who arrives on Het Wapen van Zierikzee (24 May 1671) but dies at the Cape (12 April 1672) and who as administrateur heads the provisional administration following the death of Cape Commander Pieter Hackius (30 November / 1 December 1671).  Secunde at the Cape with rank of upper-merchant (1672-1676). Problems continue, including the outbreak of the so-called 2nd Dutch-Hottentot War.  Imprisoned for corruption (1675).  On 12 February 1676 [at a time when Goske is outgoing governor and Bax incoming governor]:  The Commissioner [Nicolaas Verburg, ex-Director-General of India] now lays on the table a memorial from the merchant and ex-secunde Albert van Breugel, showing that he had for some time been confined in his own room, and afterwards in the new Fort, and as he is still a prisoner, he humbly requests to be set at liberty (with the promise of appearing at any time at the Fort when required), and that the charges against him might be shown to him, that he might meet them to the best of his ability:  also that the free-shoemaker, Jacques Jacqueline [sic – Giocomo Jacolini (from Venice)], who is on the point of leaving for Batavia, might be ordered to remain here, in order to be of service to the Memorialist in defence. After consideration it was decided for the present not to entertain his request to be liberated on bail, but to depute the merchant Johan Putmans and the Lieutenant Dircq Jansz: Smient, to ask him, in the name of the Admiral and the Council for what reason the shoemaker, Jacques Jacqueline, should not be allowed to depart to Batavia, but be kept here.  It was further decided to instruct Fiscal Hendrik Crudop to take proceedings against v.[an] Breugel for the deficit caused during his administration, and to do so as quickly as possible, that his case which (he) has hitherto impertinently been delaying, may once for all be ended, as his measure of postponement has been meted out so fully to him in all things that there is no reason to give him any further respite, as will appear from the various resolutions from time to time adopted on the subject.  The deputation that same evening proceeded to the house of Breugel and submitted the following report” – “After the adjournment of the Council meeting, they had, as instructed, proceeded to the room of the merchant, Albert van Breugel, ex-secunde here, and asked him why in his memorial he had requested that the free shoemaker, Jacques Jacquelini [sic], who had already been given a passage on one of the ships for Batavia, should not be permitted to leave, but be kept here for some time longer?  That His Honour had replied that it was to testify to the truth regarding his deep gambling some time ago, on various occasions with the ex-butler, Cornelis Pietersz: Lumes [Linnes], adding, however, that it was not quite necessary, as there were various persons still here who had often seen, and could testify to it.” – (Signed) JOAN PUTMANS, DIRCQ JANSZ: SMIENT, and LAMBERT DE GROOTE,Secretary.  It was accordingly decided to let Jacques Jacquelini proceed to Batavia. – (Signed) N.[icolaas] VERBURGH, ISBRAND GOSKE, JOHAN BAX (named of Herentals), JOOST CLANT, JOAN PUTMANS, J.[ohan] B.[artholt] SONHIUS, H. CRUDOP, and LAMBERT DE GROOTE, Secretary.  Departs for Batavia (4 June 1676).

[8] Magister Arnout van Overbe(e)ke (1632-1674) – VOC’s Honourable Councillor of Justice, poet & diarist, returning to the Netherlands as admiral on the Return Fleet from Batavia (now Jakarta, Java, Indonesia), appointed commissioner to inspect the VOC’s administration at Caput Bonae Spei (‘Cape of Good Hope’); sailing on Tidoor, arrives (25 March 1672) and departs (23 April 1672); at his instigation 1st treaty formally purchasing the Cape District from the indigenous Khoe (Hottentots), is signed (19 April 1672); he had stopped over at  Cape as chief merchant (July 1668) arriving on the Zuijt Polsbroek of Amsterdam and leaving again (6 August 1668) meeting new commander Jacob Borghorst whom he describes in his writings Alle de Rymverken … (Amsterdam, 1699 – 1st edition 1672), as being sieckum (ie ‘bad’) in agreement with local Cape indigenes and is joined by the outgoing, disgraced and recalled commander, Cornelis van Quaelbergen & his family, who accompany him to Batavia. Writer & poet in the style of Tengnagel and Focquenbroch:  publishes Anecdota sive historiae jocosae (1672-1674) & travel journal Geestige en vermaecklycke reijs beschrijving naar Oost-Indiën (1668) & poetry anthology Geestige wercken (1678); When back in The Hague, becomes member of Rederikerskamer; he dies at Amsterdam (16 July 1674).

[9] Donald Moodie, The Record (1838), p. 325 – Despatch from Governor Isbrand Goske and Council, to the Chamber XVII (10 May 1673).

[10] Joannes / Joan (Jan) Pietersz: Wittebol (1648-1681) – 1648:  born Amsterdam; 2 May 1668:  departs Texel as soldier on de Gecroonde Vreede [Gekroonde Vrede];   28 September 1668:  arrives at the Cape as soldier / midshipman on de Gecroonde Vreede [Gekroonde Vrede]: … Jan Wittebol van Amsterdam a[nn]o. 1668 met de Gecroonde Vreede voor soldaet a ƒ10 ter mt. hier aangelant, geduijrig de plaetse van landmeter vervult ende op de Secretarie als provisioneel adsistent g’imploijeert, wert, ten insigte voortaan de winckel benevens voors. landmetersplaetse sal moeten waernemen, met de qualiteijt van adsistent ende twintigh gulden ter maant binnen verband bevestigt, blijvende daervoor gehouden sijn tijt uijt te dienen, en als klerck mede op de Secretarije te schrijven [CA: C 6 (Resolutions of the Council of Policy, 4 & 5 March 1670), pp. 24-65]; 1669:  Jan Pietersz: Wittebol – member of Cape Congregation;  11 December 1669:  Commander Jacob Borghorst authorises the fiscal Cornelis de Cretzer to investigate and prosecute (assisted by Johannes Coon, Dirk Jansz: Smiend, Joan Wittebol & Jan Valckenrijck) the exiled convict (bandiet), the Company slave Susanna Een Oor van Bengale for committing infanticide following the controversial death of her smallpox-ridden Cape-born infant daughter Elsie – they report as follows: “… December 11th. – In the evening meeting the Fiscal [Cornelis de Cretzer] reported that a female slave of the Company, named Susanna of Bengal, lying stiff and stinking of the small-pox in the slave house, had not hesitated to strangle her infant, a half-caste girl; he likewise submitted the sworn declaration of the surgeon, which mentioned that the poor innocent child [Elsie] had died in consequence.  The Council having considered this serious affair at once, ordered that the murderous pig should be placed in confinement in order to be punished according to her deserts …” [H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Journal 1662-1670, p. 308];  1670:  assistant & surveyor;  11 April 1672: junior merchant … Alsoo Joan Wittebol met het schip d’ Gecroonde Vreede voor adelborst en ƒ10 ter mt. in ‘t jaer 1669 hier te lande gecomen, en zedert door d’ E.[dele] H[ee]r. Commissaris Mattheus van den Broeck in ‘t jaer 1670 tot adsistent en lantmeeter gevordert, met die conditie dat voortaen ‘s Comps. winckel als winckelier soude moeten waerneemen ende d’selve sich niet allenich zedert in die functien wel en tot genoegen g’evertueert maer oock daerenboven als nu aangenomen heeft d’ achterstallige negotieboeken van den overleeden ondercoopman Daniel Froijmanteau (van uit. Julij aff, gants ongereddert leggende) met den aancleve van dien, onder opsicht van den E. Albert van Breugel, coopman en secunde deser plaatse, in debita forma te vereffenen, en derhalven versogt heeft, in qualiteijt enigsints verhoogt te mogen werden, Soo is ‘t dat denselven uijt die consideratien d’ qualiteijt van ondercoopman sonder verhoginge van gagie binnen verbant toegevoegt hebben, mits genietende enelijck het tractement maandelijx daertoe staande … Aldus geresolveert in ‘t Fort de Goede Hoope ten dage en jaare voors. ISBRAND GOSKE.ALBERT VAN BREUGEL.DIRCQ. JANSZ. SMIENDT.H. CRUDOP. In R. en S. [CA: C 7, Resolutions of the Council of Policy (11 April 1672), pp. 90-103]; 19 October 1672:  Maria van Ruijven / Ruyven (from Delft, Zuid-Holland)on arrives at the Cape on the Vryheijt with her parents:  her father Jan van Reuven / Ruijven (dies 22 January 1673) – arrives as freeman and is admitted as notary by the Governor-and-Council [Journal (2 November 1672)] while her mother dies soon after father – “his wife is very dangerously ill” [H.C.V. Leibbrandt,  Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Journal 1671-1674 & 1676, p. 86];  29 October 1673:  baptism of his voordochter Henrietta (Jette) Wittebol / Wittebols: alias Henrietta (Jette) Claesz: by the private (later manumitted) slave woman Sara / Zara van Solor / Zoloor / Siloon aliasSara Seloor belonging to Willem dan Dieden (from Amsterdam) known as Dide meit [‘Van Dieden’s servant’]: … den 29 dito [October] [1673] een onbekent christens kint waarvan der moeder was Sara van Soloor meyt van Willem van Dieden wierd gen:[aem]t Henrijtte was Margriet Meeckhoff; 16 September 1674:  marriage at the Cape to Maria van Ruijven / Ruyven (from Delft, Zuid-Holland):  Johan Witteboll, jongman van Amsterdam en Maria van Ruyven geboortigh van Delft, jongedochter; 14 October 1674: … Den 14 Octob:[e]r een Soontie van Jan Witteboll en syn huysvrouw Maria van Ruyven de naam was Jan onder het getuychenis van Jacomijntie Backers; 28 December 1674:  Company shopkeeper discharged & demoted to soldier: “The salesman and provisional junior merchant, Joan Wittebol, who had also a deficit  in his administration in 1673, was degraded from office, rank and pay and further declared unworthy to serve the Companany longer at the pen” [H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Journal, p. 228]; 1676:  Jan Wittebol & Maria van Ruijven – Communicants at the Cape Church;  1676: visiting VOC Commissioner Nicolaes Verburg appoints him school teacher – the colony`s 1st formally appointed & more permanent teacher [Anna J. Boeseken,Uit die Raad van Justisie, p. 372, n. 1009; Donald Moodie, The Record, p. 340];  1 October 1676:  granted De Leem Bries – property no. 1086; 1678: co-opted onto Council of Policy; June 1679:  Jan Pietersz: Wittebol sues Anthonij to repay the sum of f 222 that he had borrowed from the free-black Manuel van Angola; April 1680: ordinary (rather than co-opted) Council member;  15 June 1680:  buys the slave Jan from an unknown origin from the above estate from the estate of Hildegard Redoux, the late widow of Johan Valckenrijck for Rds. 32;  13.March 1681: Domingo van Bengale, sold by the widow of Joan de Koningh to Jan Wittebol for Rds. 40, Cape valuation [Note:  Domingo van Bengale – 1st recorded male slave of that name – only buys his freedom (1 August 1689) from Matthijs Greeff (from Magdeburg)  & is previously owned by Simon van der Stel who sells him (25 September 1686)  with: Dominga van Bengale (aged 25/26) & Bacacan from Macassar) to Matthijs Greeff – no record of Simon van der Stel purchasing Domingo found – the presumption being that the Domingo van Bengale sold (13 March 1681) by widow of Joan de Koningh to Jan Wittebol (from Amsterdam) for Rds 40 (Cape valuation) – as Wittebol dies Cape (1681) – is the same slave that Van der Stel purchases from his deceased estate];  15 July 1681:  dies at the Cape;  1683:  transfer no. 195 (1683:); name not given [De Leem Bries]; garden in Table Valley; 2.167 morgen; seller: Jan Wittebol (Company employee) [?deceased estate]; buyer: Arnoldus Willemsz: Basson (from Wesel, Duchy of Cleves) (burgher) [Elphick & Shell, Cape Cadastral Calendar] [Note:  the ownership of this property by his widow, the free-black Maaij Ansela van Bengale aka Moeder Jagt, is reconfirmed (1702)];  competent surveyor & architectural draughtsman of the highest quality, surveys & maps inter alia the Hottentots Holland (1671) & instructed to compile 1st map of Stellenbosch (1680), though no such map has survived; also makes 2 excellent pencil sketches of the Castle at the time of construction now housed in the State Archives,The Hague, viz.: ‘T Casteel De Goede Hoop in het perspectief van de waterkant af te sien (The Castle of Good Hope in perspective as seen from the shoreline) & Platte grondt van’t Casteel de Goede Hoop (Plan of the Castle of Good Hope);  1 September 1683:  Den Secretaris van de Weescamer Roeloff Backer sal y gelieren te betaalen aan Johannis Smits, als Schoolm:[eeste]r sev:[e]n en twintich gulden vijftegen Rxd:rs te weten 16 uren 18/m lesin schrijven en te leeren van de naergelatene weese van Anthonij van Bengale genaemt Christoffel [Snijman] en R81 aen papier en pennen t’samen R”17:-:- Item 10 over 10/m leeren lesen van de de nagelatene weese van den ondercoopman Johannis S[ieu]r Wittebol Zal:[ige]r klaessen van beijde verschenen ultimo Augustij 1683 en aen boecken voor Jan Wittebol R 15:- sijnde t’samen de voors:de R 27:15. A[nno]d[omin]y in ’t Casteel de Goede Hoop desen 1er 7b:[e]r [September] 1683. [signed] R.[oelof] de Man Rds 27:15;  1 April 1692: 

Willem L: Wiederhold
Jan Wittebol
Eersten April 1692

Aan Cabo de Boa Esperance, den December 1692

Inventaris der goederen van weeskinderen dat bij de Weeskamer nog is berustende, als namentlijk

2 silveren koordebanden
2 p:s broexknoopen, van silvere
1 silveren haak, van een deegen
1 silveren tandestooker
1 silveren leepel
1 silveren oude signet ring
1 silveren signet ring met een valsch steentje heel slegt
1 geboorduurd beursjen

Secretaris van de Weeskamer laat volgen aan Willem L: Wiederhold het bovengenoemde silvergoed te weten 2 silvere koorde banden, 2 silvere broexknopen, een silvere haak van een degen, 1 silvere tandestooker, 1 silvere lepel, 1 geboorduurt beursje, actum den eersten April 1692 ter ordinantie van Weesmeesteren

Z: Saell

Ick ondergeschreven Jan Wittebol de jonge beken ontfangen te hebben van de secretaris van de Weeskamer Albert Coopman twee goude ringen, een signet ring, en een met een steentje, slegt die van mijn vader zalig:[e]r Jan Wittebol nog bij de Weeskamer hier ter plaatse waren berustende.

Actum aan de Kaab de Goede Hoop den 2 Junij, a:o 1692.

Dit is de handteykening + van Jan Wittebol de Jonge [CA: MOOC 8/1, no. 9]; 13 May 1699: 13 May 1699:  Jan Klaasz: (13 Maij 1699):  Inventaris en taxatie den goederen, nagelaten en met de dood ontruijmt bij den overleden vrijborger Jan Klaasz: Molenaar ten behoeven van sijn egte vrouw Hendriette Klaasdogter ten eener; en 4 kinderen onderbenoemt ten anderen zijde: soo als de selve bij de boedelhoutster voorn:[oem]t ende E:E: Weesmeesteren zijn gewardeert, bestaande in als volgd, namentlijk

Een huijsje en erv gelegen in de Tafelvalleij, benoortwesten van ‘t erv van juff:r Marragrieta Hendrina van Otteren; bezuijtoosten van het erv van mons:r Willem ten Damme; benoortoosten van dat van haar vader, Klaas Gerritsz: van Bengalen, en bezuijtwesten van de Tafelbaij, gekregen van haar vader voornaemt, dog nog geen ervgrond-brief daar van hebbende, op1800
eenige huijsmeublen van geen groot belangh, gewaardeert tesamen op200
voorsz: boedel is schuldigh aan drie diversche persoonen volgens bewijs400
Blijft het netto deses boedels ten somme1600
compt voor de 4 kinderen haar aanpart800
zijnde hooft voor hooft een somma namentlijk
Klaas Jansz: oud 5200
Jan Jansz: oud 4200
Maria Jansz: oud 7 en200
Sara Jansz: oud 1 1/2 jaaren200
Blijft voor de boedelhoutster voorsz: meede gelijke agt hondert guldens

Aldus geinventariseert en geprijseert ter Weeskamer aan Kaap de Goede Hoop; onder verklaring dat de boedelhoutster voorsz: niet agter gehouden ofte versweegen heeft, soo ten als deselve bekent is, presenteerende sulkx ten allen tijden met ede nader te bevestigen den 13:en Maij a:[nn]o 1699.

Gecommitt: Weesmeesteren: Adriaen van Reede, Cornelis Botma

Hendriette Clasen [Opm.: Oorspronklik geteken as Hendriette Wittebol, Wittebol doodgetrek en met Clasen (dowwer ink) vervang]

In kennisse van mij: A: Coopman, Secret:s [CA: MOOC 8/1, no. 41]

 [CA: MOOC 13/1/2 (Boedel Reekeningen), no. 31 (Henrietta Wittebol Laast We[duw]:e Willem Lodewijk Wiederholt)][]

[11] Cornelis Pietersz: [Petersen] Linnes from Christiania [now Oslo], Norway; 25 February 1669:  arrives ex Batavia as soldier on Sticht van Utrecht; 1672: bottelier; 15 September 1674:  “Cornelis Pietersz: Lumis [Linnes], of Christiania having been employed for nearly 2 years as butler in the store under the supervision of the Administrator, having been imprisoned for some weeks in consequence of dissatisfaction given by him, was now also convicted of having conveyed 2 half-aums of red brandy at night from the old Fort to the residence of a licensed dealer in strong drinks [Willem van Dieden]. To whose servant he delivered it on condition, without the knowledge of the master of the latter, to sell it for mutual benefit.  In order to be better secured, he was removed to the Prison in the new Castle.  No doubt he will have more to confess” [Company Journal]; 7 December 1674, Court of Justice in Session.  Trial of a certain butler, named Cornelis Pietersen [Cornelis Petersen Linnes], who had pretty well, as already mentioned, defrauded the Company during his administration; 28 December 1674:  “In order to clear the prisons, the court of justice sat during the forenoon.  Amongst others sentence was passed on the butler [Cornelis Petersen Linnes], who was condemned to serve for 20 years as a convict on Robben Island, and declared unfit to serve the Company any longer.  The salesman and provisional junior merchant, Joan Wittebol, who had also a deficit in his administration in 1673, was degraded from office, rank and pay and further declared unworthy to serve the Company any longer at the pen”;  1675:  convicted of fraud (bedrog) & banished to Robben Island for 20 years – his case is connected to that of Albert van Breugel Sr. who is acquitted – consequently so is he; he has a weakness for gambling;  12 February 1676: [at a time when Goske is outgoing governor and Bax incoming governor]:  The Commissioner [Nicolaas Verburg, ex-Director-General of India] now lays on the table a memorial from the merchant and ex-secunde Albert van Breugel [Sr.], showing that he had for some time been confined in his own room, and afterwards in the new Fort, and as he is still a prisoner, he humbly requests to be set at liberty (with the promise of appearing at any time at the Fort when required), and that the charges against him might be shown to him, that he might meet them to the best of his ability:  also that the free-shoemaker, Jacques Jacqueline [sic] [from Venice], who is on the point of leaving for Batavia, might be ordered to remain here, in order to be of service to the Memorialist in defence.  After consideration it was decided for the present not to entertain his request to be liberated on bail, but to depute the merchant Johan Putmans and the Lieutenant Dircq Jansz: Smient, to ask him, in the name of the Admiral and the Council for what reason the shoemaker, Jacques Jacqueline, should not be allowed to depart to Batavia, but be kept here.  It was further decided to instruct Fiscal Hendrik Crudop to take proceedings against v.[an] Breugel for the deficit caused during his administration, and to do so as quickly as possible, that his case which (he) has hitherto impertinently been delaying, may once for all be ended, as his measure of postponement has been meted out so fully to him in all things that there is no reason to give him any further respite, as will appear from the various resolutions from time to time adopted on the subject.  The deputation that same evening proceeded to the house of Breugel and submitted the following report” – “ After the adjournment of the Council meeting, they had, as instructed, proceeded to the room of the merchant, Albert van Breugel, ex-secunde here, and asked him why in his memorial he had requested that the free-shoemaker, Jacques Jacquelini [sic], who had already been given a passage on one of the ships for Batavia, should not be permitted to leave, but be kept here for some time longer?  That His Honour had replied that it was to testify to the truth regarding his deep gambling some time ago, on various occasions with the ex-butler, Cornelis Pietersz: Lumes [Linnes], adding, however, that it was not quite necessary, as there were various persons still here who had often seen, and could testify to it.” – (Signed) JOAN PUTMANS, DIRCQ JANSZ: SMIENT, and LAMBERT DE GROOTE, Secretary.  It was accordingly decided to let Jacques Jacquelini proceed to Batavia. – (Signed) N.[icolaas] VERBURGH, ISBRAND GOSKE, JOHAN BAX (named of Herentals), JOOST CLANT, JOAN PUTMANS, J.[ohan] B.[artholt] SONHIUS, H. CRUDOP, and LAMBERT DE GROOTE, Secretary.;   15 March 1681:  request to be acquitted; 22 June 1682:  marries Cape Geertruy Lubberinghs: / Lubberinck / Lusberinghs: (from Amsterdam) … Cornelius Pieterse Linnes jonkman en Geertruy Lusberinghs:, jonged. [ogter]…;  10 December 1682:  Isabel van Madagascar sold by Joan Coenraed: Visser (from Ommen in Overijssel) to Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes for Rds 25; 22 June 1682:  marries Cape …  Cornelius Pieterse Linnes jonkman met Geertruy Lusberinghs:, jonged.[ogter]boekhouder; 27 June 1683: … A[nn]d'[ominii] 1683 den 27 Jun.[ie] Sibilla – Cornelis Lin[n]es en Geertruid Lubbringhs: witnessed by Maria Lindenhoveius & Andreas de Man] [DRC/A: G1 1/1, Nederduitsch Gereformeerde Kerk, Kerken Boek (Baptisms)];  28 November 1684:  Joannes Mulder, winckelier (replaced by the former negotie boechouder en packhuijsmeester Cornelis Linnes & promoted (with Jan Hendrick Blum) to guarnisoen boechouder; 1685:  accompanies Governor Simon van der Stel to Namaqualand; 25 April 1685: Willem van Wijk (from Ingen, Gelderland) sold his share of the farm Paradijs to his partner, Hans Erentraut, and moved to the garden Roode Hek which he had purchased from Cornelis Petersen Linnes (from Christiania [now Oslo], Norway) with the slave Anthonij van Guinea (14 years old).  He had to promise to free the slave Anthoni en at tot toegift van seecker gekochte thuijn hem te vrijen en te guaranderen als na reghten, alles sonder fraude [Deeds Office (DO) & CA:  Tranporten en Schepenkennis,  vol. XIV, p. 47, Anna J. Böeseken, Slaves and Free Blacks, p. 142]; 26 October 1685: Isabel van Madagascar (aged 12/13) sold by Oliver Cranisbough to Cornelis Linnes; 14 March 1686:  Jacob van Madagascar (aged 8/10) sold by skipper Theunis de Hoop to Corn.[elis] Pietersz Linnes – price not given;  16 March 1686:  Abraham van Macassar (aged 20/22) sold by Adriaan Vos skipper of the Bantam to Cornelis Pietersz Linnes;  8 May 1686: Jannetje Bord / Bort, Maria Schalck: & Armosyn de Groote van de Caep, Company owned halfslag slaves, are emancipated by Council of Policy resolution convened by Simon van der Stel, at which Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes, Oelof Bergh, Andrijs de Man, Jeronimus Croese, Albert van Breugel, Johan Heinrich Blom, Johannes van Keulen & Johannes Guilliamer de Grevenbroeck preside [CA: C 18, pp. 28-29];   8 December 1686:  A[nn]o’ 1686 den 8 dito (December) Johannes JustusJan Hendrik Blum en Margarita Hendrina van Ot[tren] Cornelis Linnes en Anna B[ergh];  24 March 1687:  Piramus & Baron van Madagascar sold by Huibert Hoffen, 1st mate of the Jambi  to Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes for Rds 60; 2 January 1687:  In tegenwoordigheid van alle de leden. Het anstendig versoek eniger ’s Comp[agnie]s. slaven en slavinnen om eindelijk, na veler jaren goede en trouwe diensten, in vrijdom gesteld te mogen worden, in bedenking genomen en rijpelijk in Rade overwogen zijnde: So is eenpaarlijk goedgevonden en besloten ses derselver, namentlijk Arie [Adriaen] van Bengale, Abraham [Serrij] van Guinea, Leidsare, Miramoor [Mira Moor van Ceylon] and the vrouwen Gratia d’ Acosta and Cladoor [Koddo / Prodo / Plad Oor aka Cornelia Arabus van Abisinna] gemerkt sij oud en afgeleevd en buijten staat langer te konnen dienen, en meer tot last dan voordeel van d’ E.[dele] Comp.[agnie] bevonden worden, haar de vrijheid te vergunnen en toe te staan hun bij gepermitteerde middelen hier sig t’ erneren en door dit exempel andere lijfeigene an te moedigen om door goed comportement eenmaal met ’t selve voor-regt begivtigd te mogen worden. [1]Aldus gearresteerd en besloten in ’t Casteel de Goede Hoop, jaar en dag als boven. [signed] S.[imon] v. STEL. AND[rie]S, DE MAN, J.[eronimus] CRUSE, J. v. KEULEN, DOMINIQUE DE CHAVONNES, L. v. STEL, CORNELIS P[ie]T[ers]Z: LINNES, J. H. BLUMMe praesente J. G. DE GREVENBROEK, Secr[e]t[aris]. [CA: C 18, pp. 98-99 & C 592: Orig.[inele] Dagregister, 1687, pp. 7–9: Donderdag den 2. Januarij 1687];  23 February 1687:  den 23 dito [February 1687] Susanna – Diedelof Bieboe [Bibault / Biebouw], en Diana [van Madagascar], slavin van Cornelis Linnes [later wife to the free-burgher Willem Odendaal];  3 February 1688:   Rebecca van Coromandel (aged 28), Nancy van Coromandel (aged 15/16) & Margarita van Coromandel (aged 21/22), sold by Pieter Mos, seaman of the Danish ship Gulden Leeuw, for Rds. 50 each to Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes; 22 February 1688:  Catharina van Madagascar (aged 13) sold by Pieter Cornelis Linnes at the public auction of the possessions of the late Barbara Geens: to Diederick Potter for f 150, Cape valuation;  17 April 1688:  Paul van Madagascar (aged 20) sold by public auction by Andries de Man & Cornelis Linnes ex the estate of Hans Erentraut to Willem ten Damme for f 150 [originally purchased 5 May 1686 from Will Deeron] 17 April 1688: Anthonij van Mozambique (aged 18) sold by public auction by Andries de Man & Cornelis Linnes ex the estate of Hans Erentraut to Nicolaas Loupscher [Laubscher] for f 226 [originally purchased 18 March 1686 from Capt. J. Homen];  11 May 1688: Benjamin van Bengale (aged 10/11) sold by Marten Clasen Buijck to Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes for Rds 30;  11 July 1688: … 11 [A[nn]o. 1688] Den 11 Julij is een kind gedoopt en genaamd Johannes Cornelis waar van vader is Johannes Reijckman van Weij moeder Maria Mathijsse de getuijgen Monsr. Cornelis Pieterse Linnes en Maria Lindenhovius; Wednesday 16 February 1689:  Resolutions of the Council of Policy, Het versoek-schrivt van den E.[dele] Pieter van Helsdingen, gedesigneerde fiscâl ten dienste van d’E.[dele] Comp.[agnie] na Suratta, thans op ‘t hier ter rhede geankerde schip ‘t Wapen van Alkmâr besheiden, in Raade geleesen zijnde, inhoudende versoek om uijt ‘s Comp[agnie]s.  Slavenhuijs een slavinne genaamt Claasje [Maaij Claesje Jansz: van Angola] tot vroetvrouw ten dienste van sijn swangere huijsvrouw na Batavia mede to mogen neemen.  So is eenparig verstaan den sup[plian]t. Syn versoek toe te staan en hem de voors. Slavinne ten fine voorn.[oemde] Te laaten volgen, mits dat hij ter taxatie van de Hooge regering van India kost en vragd geld voor heen en weer reis in ‘s Comp[agnie]s.  Cassa op Batavia betaale, en de E.[dele] Comp.[agnie] voor de schaade goedspreeke die deselve soude komen te lijden, indien de meergenoemde slavinne Claasje voor haar wederkomst kwame te sterven, of weg te lopen. In’t Casteel de Goede Hoop aldus geärresteerd en beslooten ten dage en jaare als voren [signed] S.[imon] V. STEL AND[RIE]S. DE MAN   DOMINIQUE DE CHAVONNES JACOB ROOTSTEEN  L. V. STEL  CORNELIS PTZ LINNES  J.H. BLUM Me praesente J.G. DE GREVENBROEK, Secr[e]t[ari]s [Resolutions of the Council of Policy, vol. III, pp. 201-2 [CA: C6, pp. 281-282];  13 March 1689: A[nn]o 1689 den 13 Martij: een kindt ghedoopt, waervan Vader is Willem Reiniersen, ende de [sic] Moeder, Judith Duijtssers:, de ghetuijgen sijn, Joan Blom ende Juffr:[ouw] Lenius ende ghenaemt Maritie; 12 April 1689:  Cupido van Macassar (aged 20) sold by Jan Speelman skipper of De Schelde  to Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes for Rds 60;  25 April 1689:  fiscal in the inquiry into the assault by the Cape-born heelslag Elisabeth (Ljsbeth) Sanders: / Sandra: van de Caep on her foster mother the freed slave Hoen / Hoena (Anna) van Guinea [CA: CJ 291 Criminele Processtukken (Declaration: Marij van de Caep [Maria Schalks:] , 25 April 1689), p. 255]; 1 January 1690:  1690:  Den 1 Jannuarius een kindt ghedoopt waer van vader is Jan Wesselz: de moeder Helena Wijnants: [Bezuidenhout], als ghetuige ston[den] Cornelis Stevenz: Botma ende Juffr. Geertruijd Lubb[…] ende ghenaemt Joannes Cornelis;  22 April 1690:  Floor van Bengale (aged 20) sold by Abraham Post vice-admiral of return fleet to Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes for Rds 70;  17 September 1690:  Den 17 Dito (September) een kindt gedoopt waer van vader is Joannes Pretorius, de  moeder Joanna Victor, als getuijge sondt den Eerw Predic[ant]  Leonarduss [Ter]wolt, ende E.[dele] Juffr. Geertruijd [Liubring] huijsvrou van den fiscael Cornelis Linnes, ende ghenaemt Elisabet; 29 April 1691:  1691 [F:] NB: Den 29 April een kindt gedoopt waer van vader is Hendrik Bouman, de moeder Geertuij de Witt, asl getuijge stont Theunis Dirkze van Schalkwijk, ende Geertruij Lubberingh, is genaamt Christina; 12 June 1691:  appointed landdrost for Stellenbosch;  16 July 1691:  Cornelis Pieter Linnes sells Bosheuvel to Guilliam Heems;  28 July 1691:  2nd landdrost of Stellenbosch (succeeds Johannes Mulder) until 10 December 1696;  13 February 1692:  Cornelis, zoon van Dirck Coetse [Coetzee] de moeder Zara van der Schulp is gedoopt de 13 Feb 1692 als getuijge, Cornelis [Joh] Linnes met zij vrouw; 10 August 1692:  nogh aen Stellenbosch een slavinne kint gedoopt van den Landdrost Linnes, over welke getuijgen gestaan hebben, den krankbesoeker Jan Swart ende Margarita van Hoff ende is genaemt Lijsbeth [? Lysbeth Vion]; 8 February 1693:  1693 den selfde Dito een kint gedoop waer van vader is Hendrik Bouman de moeder Geertruij de With, tot getuijge was Cornelis Linnes ende Catarina Kiens:, is genaemt Johanna;  26 April 1693:  Den selfden Dito (26 April) aen Stellenbosch een kint gedoopt waer van vader is Matthijs Greeff, ende de moeder Susanna Claesze de getuijgen waren Cornelis Linnes, ende Geret[ruij] Lubrigng, ende is genaemt Susanna;  17 May 1693:  Beatries, dogter van Harmen Smit [Potgieter] de moeder Beeltie Fredricksz: is gedoopt dj 17 Maij 1693: als getùijge Dirck Coetse [Coetzee] Geertrùij Lùbbringh;  18 July 1693: the currier Ernst Friedrich Wolder / Walter(s) (from Breslau on the Oder River, Silesia [Wroclow, Poland]) is convicted for bartering illegally with the Hottentots.  In exchange for three oxen, he had given them tobacco and maize.  He had sent the Hottentot Annebëe (of the kraal of Kleijne Capteijn across the Berg River) to the Company’s post at Clapmuts to give the sergeant there a secret letter.  The sergeant thereupon released two oxen from the neighbouring Hottentot kraal, giving Annebëe tobacco.  The oxen were taken to Walter.  No evidence, however, could be advanced proving any possession on his part. Walter, adamant, sticks to his confession:  he had exchanged 3 oxen for tobacco and maize with the Hottentot named Koekedëe (also of the kraal of Kleijn Capteijn).  The Council of Justice remands the case.  In an extraordinary departure from legal practice, the Hottentots are summoned to give testimony (indigenes being disallowed as heathens by Roman-Dutch Law).  Annebëe confirms that he had conveyed a letter to the sergeant and that he had received two oxen.  These he had handed over to Walter. Koekedëe, under cross-examination, denies having had any dealings in the matter. Walter sticks to his story: no letter had been sent to the sergeant; he only had dealings with Koekedëe.  The landdrost Cornelis Petersen Linnes (from Christiania [Oslo], Norway), realising the tenuous permissibility of Hottentot testimony, now asks the Council to rest its case for proving only theft of Company cattle.  A tactical Walter, aware of the evidentiary deadlock, agrees.  The court opts to play safe.  Walter is only convicted for admitting to illegal bartering of livestock with aborigines and is fined in terms of contravening the relevant edict (recently revised 20 July 1693) again outlawing such activity.  The outcome is not to the liking of Commander Simon van der Stel who attends the follow-up trial and intervenes with the sentencing. Walter is punished more heavily in terms of fines (arbitrarily revised in loco) for such contravention – the seriousness of the matter apparently warrants immediate revision of recently promulgated penalties.  There is more to the case than meets the eye: further research reveals that Sergeant Kerkenraadt, the corporal – the venerable ex-free-burgher Jacob Cloeten (from Cologne) – and soldier Christian Martensz: (from Hamburg), (husband of the Cape-born mesties Maria Bartels:, daughter of the freed private slave woman Elisabeth (Lijsbeth) van Angola, at Clapmuts Company post were being watched closely, being old hands at illegal bartering with aborigines.  In 1686 they had been prosecuted and sent back to Clapmuts after a final warning: stop illegal activities or face the death sentence.  Prior to Walter’s conviction, Jacob Cloeten had been found brutally murdered (23 May 1693) with multiple stab wounds in front of the Castle.  His killers are never caught;  9 August 1693: den 9 Dito [Augusti] An Stellenbosch een kint gedoopt wa[er] van vader is Pijter van der Bijl, de moe[der] Anna Sophia Bos, tot getuijge stond[en] Gerrit van der Bijl, ende Geertruij Linnes, is genaeme Imma [Emma] Martha [page 50] Den selfde Dito [9 Augustii] an Stellenbos een kint gedoopt waer van vader is Roelof Pasman, de moeder Fijtie Schalk: [Sophia van der Merwe] de getuijge waren Cornelis Linnes, ende Geertruij Linnes, ende is genaemt Sijbilla; 21 February 1694:  Klaasz zoon van Jan Claas: de moeder Jette [Henrietta Wittebol] is gedoobtd: 21 Febr 1694 als getuijge Jan Swart Geertruij Lubbringh; ante 4 May 1695:  Linnes dies at Stellenbosch [CA: MOOC 5/1 (4 May 1695)]; 23 May 1695:  Anthonica van Ceylon (aged 18) sold by Frederick Russouw de Wit to Geertruij Lubberings: wid. Cornelis Pieters: Linnes for Rds 95; August 1695: Jacob de Wilde / de Wilt – his will [CA: 1/STB 18/1, no. 17 (August 1695)] mentions Geertruyd Lubberinck as his ondertroude vrou [Jacob had a wife & son in Amsterdam; 19 January 1696: Abraham van Madagascar (aged 39/40) manumitted by Geertruij Lubberinck, wid. Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes  19 January 1696:  Cupido van Malabar (aged 13) sold by Geertrij Lubberinck to Jacob Vogel for Rds 90;  August 1696:  List of persons permitted to draw their pay in Holland:- Joan Blesius, Fiscal; Adriaan Jansz: of Amsterdam, arquebusier here; Nic. Pfeiffer, corporal here; Pieter Robbertsz: of Neustadt, sergeant, & now freeman; Pierre Lormel of Dieppe, soldier; Jean Troljaart of Valenciennes, soldier; Paulus Roux d’Orange, reader in the French church of Drakenstein; Pieter Louwrensz: of Hitmore, ex- sailor, now freeman; Governor S. van der Stel; Mrs. Gertruida Lubberink, widow of the late Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes, Landdrost of Stellenbosch & Drakenstein (money to be paid to Margaretha Geertruida Lindenhovius, the widow Tas); the Rev. P. Simons, Guilliam Lorree of Nantes, freeman; Hendrik Neef of Bosholm [sic – Bordesholm], soldier  [H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope, Letters Despatched 1696-1708 (Letter no. 32, p. 347: W.A. Richards & Sons, Government Printers, Cape Town, South Africa 1896), p. 28];  31 May 1697: Pieter van Malabar (aged 30) & Augustijn van Ternaten (aged 25) sold by Geertruyd Lubberinck, the widow of Cornelis Pietersz: Linnes to Pieter van der Bijl for Rds 130;  13 November 1697:  Susanna van Bengale (aged 20) sold by Hendrik Munckerus to Susanna[sic] Lubberinck, the widow of C.P. Linnes for Rds 75 [see 6 September 1697 – 1st sold by Simon van der Stel on behalf of Willem ten Rhijne] [Resolutions of the Council of Policy, vol. III, p. 15, n. 55];  Geertruyd Lubberinck of Amsterdam, wid. Cornelis Linnes remarries Michael Ditmar / Ditmer (from Stettin), landdrost at Stellenbosch; 1693: bottler 1696-1701; 1698-1703:  assistant & landdrost of Stellenbosch; dies 1703  [GMR 1693-1702; Test. O.C. 1: 31; CJ 1164: 72] [According to his will, from Stattijn & married to Gertruyd Lubberink from Amsterdam – vide CA: CJ 2649: Testamentenboek, 1686-1708, pp. 368, 378-384; also his signature in CA: Stellenbosch 5/2: Civ. rolle gehouden bij landdrost en heemraden, a[nn]o. 1698]; concubine to  Jacob de Wilde / de Wilt – his will [CA: 1/STB 18/1, no. 17 (August 1695)] mentions Geertruyd as his ondertroude vrou [Jacob had a wife & son in Amsterdam]; 15 October 1699: 

Jacob de Wilt

15 October 1699

Inventaris off notitie der goederen die op de plaats van de overleden Jacob de Wilt, gen:[aam]t Dwers in de wegh [Dwars in die Weg, Stellenbosch]

gevonden zijn; die Geertuijd Lubbrings, weduwe Linnes, als de haare geeijgent na haar genoomen heeft,


1 bed met veeren

1 hooft peulewe

8 hooft kussens

1 tinne waterpot

1 kopere kandelaar

1 ijsere koekepan

1 ijsere treeft

1 ijsere vuurtesje

3 ijsere potten

1 lantaarne

1 theeketel

1 sonnewijser

1 thee fles met wat thee

2 houte lepels

1 ledige bottellie

1 porsselijne oliekannetje

1 porsselijne schotel

9 porsselijne theepieringen

15 porsselijne theekopjes

1 porsselijne kom

2 porsselijne trekpotten

3 bierglasen

4 kelken glasen

2 roemers glasen

1 streng zeijlgaren

2 houte slegte tafels

1 houte kadel

1 houte kasjen

2 houte rakjes

7 prentjes met swarte lijsjes

1 hand saagh

1 Bijbel in folio

1 deel de historie van Bor

10 diversche boeken

1 geboorduurde patroon tas

1 oude wagen

1 ploeg

2 nieuwe schaaren tot de ploeg

6 nieuwe planken

2 ledige houte doosen

5 kussensloopen

1 stroeijen sonnehoet

Aldus aangeteekent op de bovengenoemde plaats den 15:en October a:[nn]o 1699.

Gecommitt:e Weesm:ren: Adriaen van Reede, C:H: Diepenau

Geertruij Lubberinck

In kennisse van mij: A: Coopman, Secret:s [CA: MOOC 8/1, no. 48]; 26 September 1700:  David slavinne soon van Juffer Linnes getuijgen Michiel Ditmar en Geertruij Lubbrins: 26 Septemb[er] 1700;  30 January 1701:  Francina slavinne kint van Jùff Linnes getùijgen Matthys Dideriks: en Maria Willems: – 30 Janu[arie] 1701.

[12] Johann (Johannes) Pfeifer / Pfeiffer / Pheijffer / Phijfer / Phijffer / Phijpher / Pijfer / Pijffer (dies 1713) from Frankfurt am Main, Germany; 1675: soldier on loan – sentenced (6 years hard labour on Robben Island) for embezzlement & property confiscated; marries Cape 17 July 1690 Cape-born mestiça Maria Hendri(c)ks: / Hendrix: van de Caep (c. 1654/1655-1720)  – 1st Cape-born slave & 1st halfslag [2nd will (1720): confirms her Cape birth (c. 1654/1655) “born at Cape of Good Hope aged between 65 & 66 years” (… geboortigh van Cabo de Goede Hoop en oud tuschen 65 en 66 Jaaren) – CA: CJ 2600, no. 21, (Will: Maria Hendrix:, 1720)];  illegitimate private slave-born halfslag daughter of the private slave Maria (Marij) da Costa van Bengale / Couchin [Cochin] / de [Malabar] Cust / Paliacatta; step-daughter of: (1) freed Company slave Isaac / Isak van Bengale & (2) Frans ver Kouter / Verkouter / Kouter (from Lendelee in Zeeland);  half-sister to halfslag Margaretha Jans: Vissers: van de Caep baptized 1658 [baptism missing]; 1679: mistijs in household of Heinrich / Hendrik Crudop (from Bremen); 2 July 1696: Claas van Tuticorin is sold on behalf of Grysella Mostaart [Mostert] by Elsie Suurwaarden to Johannes Pfeiffer, for Rds. 100; 4 August 1696: Rama van Tuticorin is sold by Pieter Poock to Johannes Pfeiffer, for Rds. 100; 15 April 1697:   Is na voorgaende belijdenis tot litmaet aengenomen Maria Pijffer; 15 May 1697: Hans van Cochin   is sold by Jan Boos to Johannes Pfeiffer, for Rds. 90; 24 June 1697: Hanibal – origin unknown is sold by Symon Langendam to Johannes Pfeiffer, for Rds. 65;  1 March 1698: Anthony van Malabar is sold by Diederik Goedschalk to Johannes Pfeiffer, for Rds. 70;  18 April 1698: Thomas van de Cust Coromandel is sold by Cornelis Boesem to Johannes Pfeiffer, for Rds. 70; 2 June 1700: Letter (2 June 1700) from Joh.[annes] Phyffer to Caspar Andries Criger: “… Accept the greetings of myself, my wife and daughter … P.S. – My daughter longs very much for a fine doll …” [H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope, Letters Received, p.  272 (Letter no. 14, p. 95];  2 April 1702:  Johannes Pfeiffer, Maria Hendriks: Maria van der Westhuijsen witness baptism of Pieter van Niekerk [1702] 2 April van Cornelis van Nieùkerk en Maria van de Westhuijsen, onder getuyge van Johannes Phijffer en Maria van de Westhuijsen gent. Pieter … ; 4 January 1705:  he & Apollonia Africana Bergh witness baptism of Barbara Apollonia Klijnveld 4 Jan: 1705] van Valentijn Clijnvelt en Judith Cling, onder getuijgen van Johannes Pijffer en Apollonia Bergh, gen[aam]t: – Barbara Apollonia …; He witnesses the baptism of Jan Coutsie [Kotze] on 13 November 1707  dito [13 November 1707] van Jan Jurrie Coetsé [Kotze] en Elsje van Hoff, onder getuijgen van Joannes Peijder met Margareta van Hoff Joannes;  1709:  lessee (pachter) of wine licence: 17 October 1710: he & Maria Hendriks: witness baptism of Brigitta Rogiers: … 17 d:o [Augusti 1710] van Johannes Rogiers, en Maria Jansz: Vermeulen; de getuigen Johannes Pheijffer, en Maria Hendriksz:Brigitta …;
24 January 1712:  he & Maria Hendriks: witness baptism of Maria Elizabeth de Wit 24 d:o [Januarij 1712] van Jan de Wit, en Maria Adriaansz:; de getuigen Johannes Phijffer en zijn huisvrou MariaMaria Elizabeth …; 1712  Governor Simon van der Stel dies in their house; 1713:  dies (smallpox epidemic); 13 April 1713: in her will bequeaths f 2000 to her sister (actually half-sister) Margaretha Jans: Vissers: aan haar suster Margareta Visser & appoints niece Elsie van Hof as universal heir hare nigt Elsie van Hof huijsvrouw van de Burger Jan Jurgen Coetzee [Kotze]; as widow nominated as legatee in the will of the freed private slave Constantia van de Cust aka Constantia van Bengale / Malabar, widow of Cape-born freed slave Joost Ventura [step-brother to Jacob van Hoff – son of half-sister Margaretha Jans: Vissers:][CA: CJ  2650, no. 67 (Will: Maria Hendricks:geboortigh van de Caab, thans wed:[duw]e van de gewesen Burger Johannis Phijfer … 13 April 1713)];  2 daughters by 1st marriage: (1) Anna baptised Cape 23 September 1691 … den 23 dito een kindt gedoopt waervan vader is Joannes Phijpher de  moeder Maria Hendriks:, als getuijge stondt Lambart van Hof ende Susanna Greeffs is genaemt Anna… she marries 16 September 1708 Johannes Lette (from Leiden) & (2) Francina baptised Cape 29 November 1693 [De Villiers/Pama state incorrectly: 1692 (sic)] … de selfde Dito een kindt waervan vader is Joann Phijffer de moeder Maria Hendriks: tot getuijge stondt Lambert Lourens: ende Margrieta Hoff, is genaemt Francina… she dies in infancy [?];  Maria Hendri(c)ks: / Hendrix: van de Caep (c. 1654/1655-1720)  marries (2ndly) Cape 9 September 1714 Peter Bertram Ortmann (from Cologne, Germany) – soldier (1709);  burgher (1714); no issue; he marries (2ndly) Christina Kruijsman (daughter of Cape-born mulatta Maria Vosloo (1701-1731) & Arnoldus Kreutzmann (from Mörs, Duchy of Cleves); step-daughter of the Cape-born Arnoldus Willemsz: Basson (1693-1724) & Jan Andreas Dissel (from Jever &/or Quedlinburg) & granddaughter of the private slave  Tamar / Tambara / Thamar / Tomare van Madagascar; deported (1722) & ordered to leave the  colony by Council of Policy departing with 2nd wife to live at Rheinburg.       

[13] Krotoa aka Eva Meerhoff (c. 1643-1674) – Cape aboriginal woman of the Goringhaicona clan born on Robben Island.  Reared by the 1st Dutch commander Jan van Riebeeck and utilised by the Dutch as interpreter, envoy, trader, guide, cultural broker, mediator, agent and informant.  The Cape of Good Hope’s 1st indigene to be baptised (3 May 1662 as Eva) and to marry (2 June 1664) according to Christian rites.  Wife of the VOC’s surgeon and superintendent of Robben Island, the Copenhagen-born Pieter Meerhoff (killed 1667/8 at Antongil Bay, Madagascar while on a trading expedition).  As widow, falls into disgrace with the Dutch authorities who disapprove of her drinking, sexual and native habits.  Detained and banished without trial to Robben Island.  Dies there (29 July 1674) aged 31 years.  Her remains are later removed from the demolished church at the Castle and buried in the foundations of the Dutch Reformed Groote Kerk in Adderley Street, Cape Town.  Her known progeny forms a substantial proportion of the people classified ‘white’ under the apartheid regime.

[14] Quoted in I. Schapera & B. Farrington, The early Cape Hottentots described in the writings of Olfert Dapper (1668), Willem ten Rhyne (1686) and Johannes Gulielmus de Greyvenbroek (1695), (Van Riebeeck Society, vol. 14, Cape Town 1933), p. 115.


  • Beyers, C.J.: ‘Die navorsingswaarde van die oudste kaarte van Kaapstad.’, South African Archives Journal (1965), no. 7, pp. 38-44.
  • Böeseken, Anna J.: Resolusies van die Politieke Raad, Dele 1-3 (S.A. Argiefstukke, Die Staatsdrukker, Kaapstad 1957)
  • Böeseken, Anna J.:  Simon van der Stel en sy kinders (Kaapstad 1964)
  • Böeseken, Anna J.:  Memoriën en Instructiën 1657-1699 (Suid-Afrikaanse Argiefstukke – Belangrike Kaapse Dokumente Deel I, Staatsdrukker, Kaapstad 1966)
  • Böeseken, Anna J.:  Dagregister en Briewe van Zacharias Wagenaer 1662-1666 (Staatsdrukker, Pretoria 1973)
  • Böeseken, Anna J.:  Jan van Riebeeck en sy gesin (Tafelberg, Cape Town 1974)
  • Böeseken, Anna J.:  Slaves and Free Blacks, 1658-1700 (Tafelberg, Cape Town 1977)
  • Böeseken , Anna J.: ‘Wie was die vader van Lijsbeth van die Kaap?’, Kronos, vol. 5 (1982)
  • Böeseken, Anna J.:  Uit die Raad van Justisie, 1652-1672 (Staatsdrukker, Pretoria 1986)
  • Cairns, Margaret:  Cradle of Commerce: The Story of Block B (Woolworths (PTY) Ltd, Cape Town 1974)
  • Cairns, Margaret:  ‘Armosyn Claasz of the Cape and her Family, 1661-1783, Familia (Quarterly Journal of the Genealogical Society of South Africa), vol.  XVI no. 4 (1979), pp. 84-89 & 92-99
  • Cairns, Margaret:  ‘Freeblack landowners in the Southern Suburbs of the Cape Peninsula during the Eighteenth Century’, Kronos, vol. 10 (1985)
  • De Kock, W. J.: Dictionary of South African Biography, vol. II (Human Sciences Research Council, Pretoria 1972), p. 267
  • De Wet, G. C.: Die vryliede en vryswartes in die Kaapse nedersetting, 1657-1707 (1st ed.) (Historiese Publikasie-Vereniging Cape Town 1981), p. 184
  • Dictionary of South African biography, vol. 5, 1987
  • First Fifty Years Project
  • Fisher, R.: ‘Land surveyors and land tenure at the Cape, 1657-1812’ – in C.G.C. Martin & K.J. Friedlaender (eds), History of surveying and land tenure in South Africa: Collected papers (pp. 55-88). University of Cape Town, Department of Surveying, 1984
  • Fouché, Leo: The Diary of Adam Tas 1705-1706 (Van Riebeeck Society, Cape Town 1970)
  • Hattingh, J. Leon: ‘n Ontleding van sekere aspekte van slawerny aan die Kaap in die sewentiende eeu’, Kronos Journal of Cape History, vol. 1(1979)
  • Hattingh, J. Leon:  ‘Die Blanke nageslag van Louis van Bengale en Lijsbeth van die Kaap’, Kronos, vol. 3 (1980), pp. 5-51
  • Hattingh, J. Leon: Die Eerste Vryswartes van Stellenbosch 1679-1720 (Institute for Historical Research, University of the Western Cape, Bellville 1981)
  • Hattingh, J. Leon:  ‘Slawevrystrellings aan die Kaap, 1700-1720’, Kronos, vol. 4(1981)
  • Hattingh, J. Leon: ‘Beleid en Praktyk: Die doop van slawekinders en die sluit van gemengde verhoudings aan die Kaap voor 1720’, Kronos,  vol. 5 (1982)
  • Hattingh, J. Leon: ‘Grondbesit in die Tafelvallei.  Deel I – Die eksperiment: grondbesit van Vryswartes’, Kronos Journal of Cape History, vol. 10 (1985), pp. 32-48
  • Hattingh, J. Leon:  ‘Kaapse Notariële Stukke waarin Slawe van Vryburgers en Amptenare vermeld word (1658-1730)’ Deel I, Kronos Journal of Cape History, vol. 14 (1988), pp. 43-7)
  • Hattingh, L. Leon: ‘Kaapse Notariële Stukke waarin slawe van die Vryburgers en Amptenare vermeld word 1658-1670 – Deel I’ , Kronos, vol. 14 (1988)
  • Hattingh, J. Leon: ‘Kaapse Notariële Stukke waarin slawe van die Vryburgers en Amptenare vermeld word Deel (II)’, Kronos, vol. 15 (1989)
  • Hattingh, J. Leon: Mens – maar van ‘n ander kleur:  Vrygestelde Slawe in Nederlandse Kolonies elders as die Kaap die Goeie Hoop 1600-1800 (Navoringsverslag van die Instituut vir Historiese Navorsing, Universiteit van Wes-Kaapland, Bellville 1990)
  • Heese, Hans F.: Identiteitsprobleme in die sewentiende eeu, Kronos Journal of Cape History, vol. 1 (1979)
  • Heese, Hans F.: ‘Slawegesinne in die Kaap, 1665-1795’, Kronos, vol.4(1981)
  • Heese, Hans F.: ‘Enlightenment, Europeans and Slaves in 18th Century’ – South Africa, Kronos,  vol. 14 (1988)
  • Hoge, J.: Personalia of the Germans at the Cape 1652-1806Archives Year Book for South African History / Argief-jaarboek vir Suid-Afrikaanse Geskiedenis (Government Printer, Cape Town 1946).
  • Hoge, J.: ‘Miscegenation in South Africa in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’ in Valkhoff, Marius: New Light on Afrikaans and “Malayo-Portuguese” (Peeters, Louvain 1972), p. 100;
  • Leibbrandt, H.C.V: Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Journals, Letters and Documents Received, Letters Despatched from the Cape, Memorials or Requesten (W.A. Richards & Sons, Cape Town 1900)
  • Moodie, Donald: The Record or a Series of the Official papers relative to the Conditions and Treatment of the Native Tribes of South Africa (A.A. Balkema, Cape Town 1959)
  • Rosenthal, Eric: Bastion of the South (H. M. Joynt, Cape Town 1966), pp. 16, 23
  • Rosenthal, Eric: Encyclopaedia of Southern Africa (Juta & Company Limited, Cape Town / Johannesburg 1978)
  • Schoeman, Karel:  Here en Boere – Die kolonie aan die Kaap onder die Van der Stels, 1679-1712 (Protea Boekhuis, Pretoria 2013)
  • “The Journal of the Dutch Burgher Union of Ceylon, a Lecture Delivered by Mr. F. H. De Vos in Aid of the Galle Branch of the YMCA” (PDF). p. 185
  • Wikipedia

My Role as Facilitator in the Early Years of the Khoe-San Movement – Interview with Erwin Schweitzer, University of Hamburg (2012)

Erwin Schweitzer, University of Hamburg (2012) interviews Mansell Upham on his Role as Facilitator in the Early Years of the Khoe-San Movement –

How did you personally first learn about indigenous rights issues?

I was born in South Africa (SA) in 1960 and grew up in the Orange Free State, Transvaal, Rhodesia, Mozambique and the Western Cape. My family and the communities in which I lived were divided, dispersed, ethnically complex, racially stratified, and colonially induced. This experience profoundly shaped my fascination with identity.

Constant exposure during my white, middle class, English-speaking childhood to Hollywood westerns depicting victorious white men, Indian savagery and justified defeat spurred a concern for the effacement of indigenous peoples and cultures. I was equally bombarded with World War II-themed comics depicting victorious Americans outwitting banzai-screeching, sword-wielding, bespectacled midget Japanese soldiers. Such bias prompted me to find out more and led to an involvement with all things Japanese that continues to this day.

At nine, no longer impressed by all the royal European genealogies available to me, I began tracing my own ancestry. The lack of memory astounded me and my research is ongoing; genealogy and micro-history have became driving forces in my public and private life and the source of my interest in macro-history, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, economics, law and political philosophy.

My family’s relocation to the Western Cape was a milestone in my life, especially in terms of unravelling the intricacies of my mother’s heritage. In 1976 I was able to verify a double traceable direct descent (paternal and maternal) from the indigenous Khoe/San woman Eva Meerhoff, born Krotoa (c. 1643-1674). Disclosure met mostly with disbelief and hostility at Hottentots-Holland High, my dual-medium (English/Afrikaans) all-white state school, as did disclosure of descents from communal slave ancestors shared by the majority of (self-)identified ‘Afrikaners’.

At the same time I discovered a closer indigenous connection through my maternal 4x great-grandfather Frans Jacobs (1765-1851), recorded as a ‘Bastard Hottentot’, on whose farm the socially engineered ‘Coloured’ township Atlantis was built. My mother’s family were revealed to have been important bridging folk in the Cape’s more complex, non-static, racialized landscape.

My interest in indigenous rights grew during my legal studies at Stellenbosch University. I worked briefly as a state prosecutor before formal admission as an advocate to the High Court of South Africa then joined the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and was posted to Japan – as 3rd Secretary (1991-1994). There I initiated contact with representatives of the Ainu.

During this time the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) began and led to the enfranchisement of all South Africans. South African missions abroad were instructed to supply the Department of Constitutional Affairs with detailed information on constitutional matters, including indigenous rights and sexual orientation rights, prevailing in their host countries. During home leave, I called on Professor Phillip Tobias at the University of the Witwatersrand seeking support for greater recognition of minority rights for the Khoe and San.

South Africa’s Khoe and San groups were being denied constitutional accommodation by the Multi-Party Negotiating Process (MPNP) and their human sovereign rights were being violated by the unilateral 1913 cut-off date for land claims and the non-recognition of rights guaranteed by broken treaties. Back in Pretoria in April 1994 as DFA Assistant Director (Multilateral Division, Human Rights section), I initiated an Indigenous Peoples’ Unit promoting constitutional accommodation of remnant and ignored indigenous nations of South Africa including !Xu and Khwe relocated from Angola. We sought to convince the South African government to assert itself more actively at the United Nations (UN) following South Africa’s years of international isolation, especially at the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP).

However, attempts at political recognition for the Griqua by the Griqua National Conference of South Africa (GNC) and calls for restitution of land continued to fall on deaf ears. As DFA Assistant Director, I was utterly dismayed by meetings I had with other state departments and officials including Constitutional Affairs, Defence and SA’s newly appointed UN permanent representative to Geneva Jackie Selebi, concerning Griqua petitions for land and the allocation of land to the !Xu and Kwe detained at Schmidtsdrift.

Why did you choose to work with the GNC and not any other Khoe-San organisation?

I chose to work with the GNC because, of all the Khoe and San groups, it was the most authentic, resilient, independently operational, organized and vocal. Furthermore, it had a long history of recognition and land claims.

I was in the Department of Foreign Affairs at the time the GNC were petitioning the central government through the Department of Constitutional Affairs (DCA) (1994). As Griqua claims were being stymied or ‘contained’ by DCA with Roelf Meyer as Constitutional Affairs minister and the outgoing regime’s chief negotiator, Ms. Kate Cloete (personal secretary to Griqua Paramount Chief AAS le Fleur II) contacted DFA directly and was referred to me. This allowed us to initiate an Indigenous People’s Unit within DFA and to secure DFA participation in decisions affecting indigenous affairs at national level.

At this time I initiated a campaign for the French government to bury the remains of Saartje Baartman or to return her remains for burial. I assisted the GNC by pointing out the international fora and options available for persuading SA to negotiate with Griqua representatives. I was still hopeful that the Khoe and San nations would be constitutionally accommodated. Meanwhile, and despite GNC opposition, it had become clear that the interim constitution would be replaced by the so-called ‘final’ constitution. This left the GNC no choice but to put its case internationally.

I resigned from DFA in 1995 and accepted an invitation by the GNC to call on them personally at the Griqua reservation near Plettenberg Bay. I offered to go to the UN in Geneva to place on record Griqua aspirations as a sovereign indigenous nation and received a written mandate from Paramount Chief AAS le Fleur II to represent and legally advise the GNC attending the 13th session of the UN WGIP.

This was followed by attendance with Kate Cloete and Cecil le Fleur at both the 14th and 15th sessions in 1996 and 1997.

The GNC concluded treaties of co-operation with other splinter Griqua organizations and Nama representative groups in the Richtersveld. The Rehoboth Basters in Namibia undertook to represent these groups who could not attend at the UN.

By this time, San groups represented by Roger Chennels made an appearance at the WGIP and the Khoe-San groups began co-operating at the WGIP. Following an invitation by President Nelson Mandela, Griqua representative groups passed a joint memorandum under my chairmanship, which I presented to the President’s office on 14 December 1995. At GNC insistence the Griqua Forum was reconstituted through its alliance with the Nama people in the Richtersveld to include all Khoe and San nations.

Was the GNC the first Khoe-San organisation from South Africa to participate in a UN forum pertaining to indigenous issues?

Yes. On my first visit to Geneva, I encountered the Rehoboth Basters from Namibia as well as the Afrikaner Volksfront from South Africa but the locus standi of both groups were contested by indigenous groups world-wide.

Was the GNC the first organisation to use the indigenous rights discourse in South Africa?


Did the GNC know about indigenous rights before you informed them about it?

In terms of broadly defined indigenous rights, yes. Ever since the time of treaties with colonial powers, the Griqua have clung to their sovereignty. In terms of indigenous rights narrowly defined as in the UN context, no. Efforts by AAS le Fleur I to petition the British king were blocked as evidenced by correspondence lodged in state archives, his judicial harassment, surveillance placed on him and his people and his imprisonment. Thereafter Griqua aspirations were confined to the municipal arena.

Until when did you act as a facilitator for the GNC? And why did you stop facilitating?

I acted as facilitator for the GNC until 1998. By then, my brief had served its purpose. The agreement was to help the Griqua learn to help themselves and not be continuously represented by a non-Griqua person. I offered my services to the GNC on the understanding that I would train them in advocacy and communication strategies for more effective negotiations with governments and treaty parties. Finalizing policy was the exclusive domain of the Griqua people. My role became redundant with the passing of AAS le Fleur II and subsequent internal squabbling, African National Congress (ANC) infiltration and the creation of the National Khoisan Forum (1999), National Khoi-San Consultative Conference and National Khoi-San Council.

How do you feel about your work today?

I have mixed feelings. My work brought awareness of indigenous issues in South Africa to an international audience, creating greater opportunities for the Khoe-San. However, their vulnerability has become even more pressing as tokenism and institutionalization obfuscate the real issues. The amended constitutional protection of Khoe-San languages is a minor victory and the adoption of San symbolism in the new nation-state coat of arms is an attention-diverting ruse. Obtaining First Nations status is now even more of a pipe dream.

The emergence of and ANC support for the so-called Khoesan revivalists has muddied the waters and undermined the original and more authentic Khoe-San cause. Aboriginal Title as a legal defence and self-determination have been further eroded. The GNC’s position has weakened after obediently and subserviently accepting token land grants, made attractive by the market for eco-tourism.

“The farm Ratelgat is owned by the Griqua Ratelgat Development Trust which consists of 85 Griqua beneficiaries who agreed to make the farm available for development for the benefit of the Griqua community of South Africa. The farm was obtained via the land restitution program of Government of RSA at no cost to the Griqua community”.

The UN International Labour Organisation (ILO) and Nordic Development Aid agencies are even greater institutional tokenist bodies allowing increased outside interference. Judging by the latest utterances by Cecil le Fleur, the disavowal of Griqua sovereignty is patently clear and the GNC has already surrendered Griqua sovereignty:

“Our wish for self‐determination pertains only to the protection of our identity, cultures, traditions, languages and history. We also continue to fight to enjoy all the other individual rights others enjoy in a constitutional democracy. It is against this backdrop that the Griqua and other groups struggle for recognition of their identity” [Goedgedacht (9 & 10 February 2012)].

In conclusion, I quote in full a speech I made in 1997 which still holds essentially true and remains testimony to the original raison d’être for taking the Khoe-San struggle to the international arena.

Our National Shame

Address by Adv. Mansell Upham, Mandated Legal Representative and Envoy of the Griqua National Conference of South Africa, at the closing ceremony of the “Khoisan Identities and Cultural Heritage: Third International Conference on Khoisan Studies” held at the South African Museum in Cape Town, South Africa on 16 July 1997

Your Excellency, the Paramount Chief of the Griqua [A.A.S. le Fleur II],
Khoe/San Representatives,
Delegates to this Conference,
Honoured Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen:

Please rise and stand for a one-minute’s silence in memory of the late Saartje Baartman, who remains, as I speak, unburied and whose remains the French Government – despite respectful requests and protestations – refuses to repatriate for burial.

Even before this Conference draws to a close, this country [South Africa], judging from the media reaction and coverage thus far, has surely been shaken right down to its very aboriginal foundations.

Who could have imagined witnessing the day when Griqua choirs would sing, prayers would be in Nama, and speeches made in the aboriginal San tongues from far afield as Namibia and Botswana that refuse to be silenced – all this and nogal in the Dutch Reformed Church’s Synod Hall. Ironically, it is this building that houses the baptismal register recording the baptism of the five children of Krotoa [Eva Meerhoff].

We were struck by claims on the part of some, that this Conference was the ‘beginning’ [sic] of a Khoe/San renaissance and precursor to actually getting down to addressing some of the historical, colonial and constitutional wrongs done to Southern Africa’s aboriginal peoples and First Nations. Some of you might still be surprised to learn that much introspection became unavoidable on the part of the organisers.

The realisation had finally dawned that any conferences of this nature can never again take place without consultation and participation by the aboriginal peoples themselves. What started off as an ‘us’ and ‘them’ arrangement, finally resulted in the organizers opting for Khoe/San representatives to be recognised as “full delegates” on par with the academic participants and the sentiment expressed that a sense of a “shared responsibility” would be stimulated.

Without wishing to minimise, or even trivialise, this Conference’s formidable contribution to Khoe/San identity and cultural heritage, we should never forget the actual genesis and evolution of a Khoe/San Indigenous Rights movement in this country that preceded and helped shape this Conference.

I will never forget the day South Africa’s present Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Geneva [Jackie Selebi] presented Cecil le Fleur, Kate Cloete and myself with a copy of Deputy President Thabo Mbeki’s speech entitled “I am an African”. This was the speech Mbeki had delivered on the eve of Parliament’s Constitutional Assembly accepting the so-called ‘final’ constitution for South Africa while assuring us that the Government was truly concerned about the fate of the Griqua and South Africa’s other existing/remaining Khoe/San First Nations. We were outraged to read in Mbeki’s own words that the Khoe and San “… as a people … had perished [sic].”

This incident perhaps illustrates best the extent of, what I would term OUR NATIONAL SHAME – what the great, far-seeing Olive Schreiner termed our “own self-inflicted wound” when referring to the so-called problem of the ‘Half-caste’. Unfortunately the ‘negotiated settlement’ that saw the demise of Apartheid purposefully ignored the aboriginal peoples of this land. It has taken all this time – almost four years – to persuade Government to agree finally to address this problem – a problem that has been evaded at all costs until only very recently. On the eve of the creation of the colonially contrived and ill-conceived ‘Union of South Africa’, Olive Schreiner berated the negotiators as being “men selling their souls and the future …”

Regrettably, our recent negotiators were intent on repeating history.

Only a few major Indigenous Rights developments in the last years that helped shape this Conference into a more meaningful and equitable space need to be mentioned here, for example:

• the delegations by the Griqua National Conference of South Africa to the United Nations in Geneva in 1995 and 1996;
• the Memorandum created in terms of consensus by the various representative Griqua organizations and handed to President Nelson Mandela at his own request on 14 December 1995 – which is only beginning to receive attention now and has resulted in
• the formation by the Griqua representative organizations of a negotiation forum following high-level talks recently with Constitutional Development Minister Vali Moosa in Kimberley.

Cultural revival, protection and promotion, however are not – and can never be- enough.

Legal chicanery by colonial overlords and nation-state governments can only be countered by empowerment in terms of legal actions on the part of the Khoe/San First Nations themselves. This Conference, and any future conferences, can only have any real meaning if every single person here is committed to the protection of Indigenous Rights – an emphasis, we still feel to be lacking in the very fabric of this country’s political make-up.

Some lingering impressions:

• We were proud of the expertise and commitment of the Khoe/San delegates from Botswana and Namibia;
• We could benefit from Prof. Saugestad’s most valuable and enlightened appraisal of Indigenous Rights development at the UN;
• The solidarity demonstrated by our Indigenous brothers and sisters, the Saami
• Attempts by some academics to still cling onto divisive and expedient concepts such as ‘historic Griqua’ and ‘modern Griqua’.
Uninformed assumptions in one of the papers presented at the Conference that the Griqua National Conference of South Africa advances ‘biological purity’ in its claims as representing people who are the “last vestige of uniterrupted Khoe/San heritage”. It remains unclear how the use of the concept ‘heritage’ can be misconstrued by academics, or anyone else for that matter, as relating exclusively to matters biological and racial.

On behalf of the Griqua National Conference of South Africa and its treaty partners, the East Griqualand Pioneers Council, the Nama Representative Council of the Richtersveld, the Rehoboth Baster Community in Namibia, I wish to express our whole-hearted gratitude to Prof. Jatti Bredekamp and his Organising Committee, the delegates and all other assisting parties for further helping to set the stage for what must still be the final show-down: the attainment of Indigenous Rights that will ensure maximum protection for vulnerable indigenous minorities and redress as much as possible the wrongs of the past.

I thank you.

Olive Schreiner (1855-1920)

Cape of Good Hope’s 1st marriage recorded in Reformed Church’s 1st marriage register

by Mansell Upham

On 6 September 1665 in what is today Cape Town, Anneke Bruijns:, widow of Pieter Cornelisz: de Noorman, from Langesund in Norway, marries (2ndly) Jan Verhagen from Arendonk in Antwerp, Spanish-Netherlands [present-day Kingdom of Belgium].

This is the 1st marriage entry  in the Cape of Good Hope’s Reformed Church’s 1st marriage register commenced (23 August 1665) by Ds Joan van Arckel:

Zyn alhier in de huwelijken-staat vereenight voor de openbare vergaderinge

Joan Verhagens, van Akendonk, met Anneken Bruins, van Langebont: [sic] den 6 september 1665

The Cape of Good Hope`s 1st female Norwegian immigrant Anneke / Annetien Bruijne / Bruijns aka Annetje de Noorman [ie ‘the Northman’ – popular epithet used by the Dutch in the 17th century to denote Norwegians], who hails from Langesund in Norway, marries as a widow, the burgher Jan Verhagen from Arendonk in Antwerp, Spanish Netherland …

Langesund, Norway

One of the earliest European wives to emigrate to the Dutch VOC-occupied colony of the Cape of Good Hope, she arrives (28 August 1663) on the Meerman disguised as a man and enrolling with the VOC under the name Claas Barendsz: to join her husband Peter Cornelissen aka Pieter de Noorman also from Langesund, the free-hunter and fisherman living at the Zoute Rivier [the present-day Salt River].

He was the colony’s 2nd Norwegian free-burgher – being preceded by Roeloff Hansz: [Hanssen] from Christiania [present-day Oslo], a sailor who had arrived (17 March 1657) on the Orangien (Amsterdam Chamber), become a free-burgher (31 April 1657) and thereafter a knecht (1658) in Visagie’s Party of free-burghers, before his untimely death (1659).

A Norwegian association with, not only the Dutch Republic, but also the Cape of Good Hope, should not come as a total surprise, especially given:

(1) the long historical association between Norwegians (then in political union with Denmark), Frisians and Dutch in the 17th century – known by Norwegians as the Holland Era (1550-1750):

“Dutch ships are ‘searching every nook and cranny’ for timber and food, the customs officer in Flekkefjord wrote to the authorities in Copenhagen in the mid-17th century. He was one of a great many officials who observed Dutch vessels along the Norwegian coast in the early modern period. There was hardly a fjord, estuary or harbour that was not visited by Dutch people from Holland, Friesland, Zeeland or one of the other four provinces of the young, expanding Dutch Republic …”

Margit Løyland, The Dutch in Norway (1550 – 1750)

(2) the Hansa heritage; 

(3) the huge presence of Norwegians in the Dutch Republic:

“… More positive economic ties evolved and trade flourished between the Netherlands and Norway in the Hanseatic era, during the 15th and 16th century. Norway exported mainly wood and stone to the Netherlands; in fact, large parts of Amsterdam is built on poles made by Norwegian timber. During the 17th century a large group of Norwegians emigrated to the Netherlands as it offered better opportunities and wages than Norway. In 1650 the Norwegian population of Amsterdam had grown to approximately 13.500 people and is therefore sometimes referred to as one of the largest ‘Norwegian cities’ at the time. In the same period, Bergen was Norway’s largest city and had a similar amount of inhabitants …” [Norway in the Netherlands: Relations between Norway and the Netherlands

Pieter de Noorman – an arquebusier – had asked (30 June 1657) to became a free-burgher.  First a free-hunter (1658) before becoming a free-fisherman (Saldanhavaerder), he also serves (1660) as one of the corporals in the free-burgher militia. Thereafter, he requests to be taken back into the Company.

He dies (Thursday 7 May 1665):

Heeden is overleden P[iete]r. Cornelis van Langesont vrijeman en visscher alhier woonende aen de Zoute reviere

After his death (7 May 1665), she remarries the often-time convicted cattle rustling Verhagen who meets his untimely death (July 1673) – together with seven other free-burghers – at the hands of marauding Cape indigenes at a place later commemorated as Moordkuil.

An arquebusier at the Fort de Goede Hoop, he obtains his Letter of Freedom (1 November 1660) working as knecht at the farm Uitwijk for the free-burgher Thielman Hendricksz: (from Utrecht) – who is also massacred at Moordkuil – and his wife Maijke Hendriks: van den Bergh (from Diest in Brabant), the widow of Jacob Theunisz: (from Cooltjensplaat [Colijnsplaat, Zealand] – double ancestors of mine. He appears (1663) as one of the free-woodcutters (houthackers):

                                Jan van Hagen [Verhagen] Arendende [Arendonk, Antwerp, Belgium]     }
                               Hendrik Dircks: van Embden   } baessen
                                Claas Elders: van Meldorp [Meldorf, Ditmarsken]     }
                                Claas Jacobs: van Meldorp  [Meldorf, Ditmarsken]    }
                                                do. knechts

                                                                {Gijsbert Claes: van Tekelenburg
                                                                {Cornelis Jacobs: van Voorhout
                                                                {Jan Samuels:

Again, he appears (1664) as one of the free-sawyers:

Vrije houtsaegers

                                Claes Elders: van Meldorp [Meldorf, Ditmarsken] }

                                Herman Jans: [Potgieter]
                                Hendrick Dircx: van Embeden [Emden, Lower Saxony]}

                                Gijsbert Claes:
                                Claes Jacobs: van Meldorp [Meldorf, Ditmarsken] }

                               Jan van Arendonck

He and his wife appear in the Muster Roll (1670) with one child who appears to have died in infancy.

Jan Verhagen en Jannetje Bruijns:, 1 k.[ind] 
                en Willem Joosten in Comp[agn]ie. 
Ned.[ederlandsche] dien[ae]rs.          { Harman Jansz: [Potgieter] van Noorth [Nordhorn, Westphalia] 
                                                                { Henrick Dirckse
                                                                { Reygert

Verhagen is on record (1 January 1670) hiring for one month the slave from Cabo Vert [Dakar, Senegal] named Jan Vos – belonging to the disgraced and Robben Island-relegated widow of the Dane Peter Meerhoff (from Copenhagen), the infamous Eva, born Krotoa of the Goringhaicona (c. 1643-1674). The slave Jan Vos appears to be comically named after the famed poet, playwright, and event-planner of the same name: Jan Vos (1612-1677).

Jan Vos (1612-1677)

Before his death at Moordkuil, Verhagen takes over (4 February 1671) the farm Uitwijk [later known as Malta] and the pacht (alcohol licence) connected thereto from his former boss Thielman Hendricksz:.

Painting by Pieter Wenning (1918) showing the opstal on the farm Malta

Thereafter, he also acquires the farm Rouwkoop which his widow sells (10 September 1676) to Heinrich Sneewind (from Basle in Switzerland) and his partner Christoffel Poulusz:. This historic farm – with the original opstal redesigned by Sir Herbert Baker (1862-1946) – later comes into the possession of my paternal 4x great-grandfather Hendrik Christiaan Blatt.


Childless, destitute and a self-acknowledged alcoholic, she requests (18 May 1678) to be repatriated but ends up instead being relocated as a form of quasi-banishment to the VOC buijtenpost (outpost) on Mauritius. There, she is re-united with the recently judicially banished (1677) cattle rustler Maijke Hendricks: van den Bergh, widow of the massacred Thielman Hendricksz:

The Peripatetic Life of Michel Romond – eventual Cape burgher

by Mansell Upham

Gerrit – the infant son of the Cape-born mulatta [Eurafrican] Cornelia Bogaerts: / van [den] Bogaerde is baptised (5 September 1683) at Cape Town.

The infant’s mother is the daughter of the private slave Maria van Angola belonging to Juffrouw Coon aka Alexandrina (Sandrina) Jacobs: Maxwell aka Maxvelt (and prior to that a slave belonging to Commander Jan van Riebeeck) and half-sister to the Cape-born wife of the STEYN stamvader in South Africa, Maria Lozee.

Although born of an unknown biological father, he is legitimised just a few months prior to his baptism when his mother wed (11 July 1683) his adoptive father Michael Romond (from Zutphen in Geulders) then visiting the Cape of Good Hope from Mauritius to convey grievances of his fellow free-burghers on the island to Cape Commander Simon van der Stel.

Romond is a French Protestant [Huguenot] who had worked his passage from Batavia [present-day Jakarta on Java, Indonesia] on a Danish Indiaman.

He deserts to an English ship Unicorn when stopping over at Bantam [present-day Banten on Java, Indonesia].


He deserts again (with six other Frenchmen) when the ship stops at Mauritius staying on the island as a free-burgher.

While on Mauritius, he falls out with both VOC commanders Isaac Johannes Lamotius and Roelof Diodati – the latter being husband to in/famous Cape aborigine Eva Meerhoff born Krotoa`s granddaughter Catharina Saaijmans: [Zaaiman]

When the Dutch abandon their colony on Mauritius (1707), Romond returns with his family to the Cape settling at Zandvliet at Eerste River, Stellenbosch – which farm he purchases from the recalled Minister Petrus Kalden before relocating to the Hottentots-Holland [present-day Somerset West] after being granted (1720) the farm Helderberg

In recent years, a portion of this farm has been developed into a micro-winery named in his honour: Romond Vineyards




– Mansell Upham (Villiersdorp, 4 Januarie 1999)

Krotoa (c. 1643-1674) – Kaapse inheemse vrou van die Goringhaikona-stam gebore op Robbeneiland.  Grootgemaak deur die eerste Nederlandse kommandeur Jan van Riebeeck en as tolk, gesant, handelaar, gids, kultuur-makelaar, middelaar, agent en informant deur die Nederlanders gebruik.  Die Kaap die Goeie Hoop se eerste gedoopte inboorling (3 Mei 1662 as “Eva”) en eerste inboorling wat volgens christelike gebruik getroud is (2 Junie 1664).  Vrou van die VOC se chirurg en poshouer op Robbeneiland, die Kopenhagen-gebore Pieter Meerhoff (vermoor 1667/8 in Antongilbaai, Madagaskar gedurende ‘n handelsekspedisie).  As weduwee word haar drinkery, seksuele, natuurlike en naturelle neigings afgekeur.  Sy raak in onguns by die Nederlandse amptenary.   Aangehou  en verban sonder verhoor na Robbeneiland, sterf sy daar in die ouderdom van 31 jaar (29 Julie 1674).  Haar oorskot is later van die gesloopte kerk in die Kasteel verwyder en herbegrawe in die fondasies van die Groote Kerk in Adderleystraat, Kaapstad.  Haar gedokumenteerde nageslag vorm ‘n  substansiële deel van die mense wat onder die apartheid-stelsel “blank”  geklassifiseer is.  Selfs beroemde volkshelde soos Paul Kruger en Jannie Smuts is direkte afstammelinge van Eva.

‘n Mens mag geheime aksies probeer verdoesel,

 maar om stil te bly oor wat die hele wêreld weet,

 en oor dinge wat lei tot ernstige openbare nagevolge,

 is ‘n  onvergeeflike tekortkoming.

– Montaigne, Oor die pligte van geskiedkundiges


Daar was onlangs ‘n oorstroming van werke met twyfelagtige bespiegelings en vertolkings – almal deur vrouens – oor die belangrike historiese figuur Eva Meerhoff (gebore Krotoa).  Hulle is, o.a.:

Karen Press, Antoinette Pienaar, Beverley Mitchell, Candy Malherbe, Frances Karttunen, Barbara Hutton, Carmel Schrire, Yvette Abrahams, Christina Landman, Julia Wells, Harriet Deacon, Carli Coetzee en Dr Celestine Pretorius.

Selfs André P. Brink bou op Candy Malherbe se uitbeelding van Eva in sy jongste roman Sandkastele wanneer hy haar lewensverhaal inweef. Krotoa word ook opgeneem in die onlangse A Dictionary of South African History.  Haar nageslag (dié wat deur dokumentasie gestaaf kan word) vorm grootendeels daardie gedeelte van Suid-Afrika se bevolking wat voorheen “blank” geklassifiseer is.  Hierdie feit word deur die opstellers weggelaat. Haar ander nageslag vorm heel waarskynlik ‘n verborge gedeelte van die Kaap se oorwegende afro-eurasiese bevolking.  Hoekom word hulle ook nie genoem nie?  Word sulke feite weggelaat omdat hulle polities onkorrek veroordeel word?  Selfs die onlangse gepubliseerde The Essential Robben Island kort sulke belangrike feite.  Krotoa se nageslag word heeltemal uit die geskiedenis geskryf. 

‘n Krotoa-afstammeling ontboesem…

Ek is ‘n direkte afstammeling van Krotoa – deur my pa en my ma.  Ek doen navorsing  oor Krotoa vir r reeds meer as 20 jaar.  Haar storie het ek gereeld in die openbaar en in druk bepleit.  Reeds in 1977, toe my bloedlyn eers dokumentêr gestaaf is, het ek my afstamming van Krotoa openlik verklaar.  ‘Blank’-geklassifiseerde mense het destyds meestal stil gebly wanneer met bewyse van ‘Hottentot’ voorouers gekonfronteer. Sedertdien lees ek met groot belangstelling wat ander mense te sê het oor hierdie voormoeder wat soveel ander mede-Suid-Afrikaners met my deel. 

Opmerkend is die feit dat Krotoa se laaste jare, haar invloed, en haar nageslag, totaal geïgnoreer word.  Die Afrikanerdom huiwer om sy verbasterde (insluitend Khoe/San) herkoms kollektief te erken.  Geen wonder dat die bestaande geskrewe rekord van Krotoa se lewe nooit met erns opgeneem is nie.  Nuut-verskansde, na-apartheid intellengentsia is blykbaar net so onwillig om bestaande rekords te ondersoek.  Die bewysbare en dokumenteerbare voorouerlike aansprake deur ‘n groot getal ‘blank’-lykende Suid-Afrikaners, word doelbewus geminimaliseer en selfs geïgnoreer.

Geen nuwe primêre navorsing is deur enige van bogenoemde vrouens  gedoen nie.  Die rekord van die koloniseerders en dié van hulle  konstitusionele erfgename word bloot op ‘n geselekteerde basis vertolk.  Daar word  net op beperkte gepubliseerde (en foutiewelike) werke deur vorige geskiedkundiges, gesteun.  Daar bestaan ook ‘n neiging om selfs die rekords te verwerp.

Klaarblyklik word geen pogings aangewend om beskikbare rekords behoorlik en volledig te raadpleeg nie.  Sodoende het ons ‘n onvolledige stel feite wat minder geldige vertolkings toelaat.  Daar kort ‘n gesonde kultuur van ondersoek wat die werklike gebeurtenisse meer kan openbaar. Spekulatiewe geskiedenis, maak byvoorbeeld beter sin en skep meer ruimte, indien aanvanklike wetenskaplike ondersoek nie beperk word nie.  Bogenoemde skrywers en vertolkers verdiep hulle eers in die jongste teorie.  Dan eers kies hulle sekere biskikbare feite om so ‘n teorie te staaf.  Twyfelagtige veronderstellings en gevolgtrekkings word beperk tot ideologie alleen.

Maar wie het die meeste gesag om Krotoa te evalueer?

Vrouens?  Feministe?  Gays?  Mans?  Akademici?  Meer ‘Khoe-San-agtige’ of ‘Khoe-San-afstammende vrouens? ‘Bruin’ vrouens?  ‘African-Americans’?  ‘Swartes’?, ‘Afrikaners’?  ‘Africans’?  Haar eie direkte afstammelinge?  Of net persone wat graag méér omtrent Krotoa wil weet?

Wie bepaal outentisiteit?  Wie is die bewaarders van die Ark?

Danksy politieke –  die term word hier in die wydste sin moontlik gebruik – agendas, onthul dié jongste werke en vertolkings doelbewuste pogings om Krotoa haarself die heeltyd tot swye te bring.  Ja, Krotoa is nog steeds in ‘n soort bewaring vasgevang.

Wanneer gewaag word om namens Eva te praat en hierdie alternatiewe stemme te bevraagteken, kom verskeie vals argumente te voorskyn, bv.:

  • Rassistiese en eksklusivistiese argumente dat ‘blankes’ op die agtergrond gedruk moet word om plek te maak vir ‘nie-blankes’ of ‘swart’ historici wat blykbaar nooit toegang tot primêre rekords gehad het en nooit die geskiedenis self kon opskryf nie;
  • Seksistiese argumente dat mans, teenoor vrouens, dalk minder geskik is om oor vroue sake kommentaar te lewer;
  • Eva se nageslag is  binne die ‘blanke’ gemeenskap ge-assimmileer;  dus is haar blank-lykende afstammelinge ongeskik om enige aanspraak op Khoe, San of ‘African’ erfenis in die ‘nuwe’ Suid-Afrika te  maak;
  • ‘Afrikaners’ mag (of mag nie) nou hulle reg om ‘African’ te wees, dws deur Eva, onderhandel of her-onderhandel.  Hulle afstamming  het  hulle nog nie kollektief op enige tasbare manier erken nie;
  • Slegs as gevolg van die afskaffing van apartheid, het sommige Eva-afstammelinge eers nou hulle stemme  laat hoor;
  • Openbare en ander rekords (en die raadpleging daarvan) is koloniaal besmet, onbetroubaar en moet verwerp word – daarom mag mense vry interpreteer.

Ondanks die ‘-ismes’, behoort historici, navorsers en akademici nie rekords volledig te raadpleeg nie?  Selfs as besluit word dat hierdie rekords nie sonder kritiek aanvaar moet word nie?  Die meeste  historici en akademici wat oor Krotoa skryf, ontduik nuwe feite of doen nie nuwe primêre navorsing nie.  Waarom?  Is dit dalk: 

  • hulle is lui – primêre navorsing is tydrowend en frustreerend;
  • sekere feite word doelbewus weggelaat – bekende en nuwe feite pas nie by  politieke agendas nie;
  • hulle is nie bekwaam om die rekords (d.w.s. 17de-eeuse skrif in Nederlands, Deens en Duits) toe te tree, verstaan of vertolk nie;
  • hulle kennis van die VOC-tydperk is beperk;
  • die jongste akademiese teoriëe word bo die behoefte aan ‘n groter empiriese en wetenskaplike studie van die onderwerp verkies?

Die gevolg?  Die polities opportunistiese  verewiging en pleging van onwaarhede:  dieselfde arme ou Eva weer opgedis.

Feite word misgekyk …

In haar biografie van Krotoa erken Candy Malherbe dat sy baie vrae oopgelaat het.  Leemtes sal in die toekoms aangevul moet word.  Hierdie biografie vorm die basis omtrent alles oor Eva Meerhoff wat daarna geskryf is.  Enige feitelike foute wat voorkom, word verder ingeprent.   Wagenaer, byvoorbeeld, is orals verkeerdelik beskou as VOC-kommandeur wat haar doodsberig geskryf het.  Wagenaer het reeds die Kaap in 1666 verlaat.  Toe Eva in 1674  dood is, het drie kommandeurs, een goewerneur en twee waarnemende kommandeurs ná Wagenaer  almal ‘n direkte rol gespeel in Eva se agteruitgang.  Sulke waninligting kom voor in omtrent alle werke wat sedert Malherbe se biografie geskryf is. 

Daar word self vergis dat daar ‘n seksuele verhouding tussen Krotoa en Jan van Riebeeck was.  Ons word verkeerdelik ingelig dat Van Riebeeck se niggie, Elisabeth van Opdorp, nooit die Kaap verlaat het nie. Sy word selfs pleegmoeder van Eva se kinders!  Indien die rekords geraadgepleeg word – selfs net gepubliseerde bronne – weet ons dat Elisabeth van Opdorp glad nie met Jan [sic] Reijniertz getroud was nie.  Sy was wél die vrou van Jacob Reyniers.  Hulle het saam die Kaap reeds op 24 Januarie 1654 verlaat!  Dit was Jan Reyniers en sy vrou Lijsbeth Jans – en nie Elisabeth van Opdorp – wat die Meerhoff-kinders in 1669 gehuisves het nadat daar op hulle in beslag gelê is.  Eva se inheemse naam word in die oorspronklike VOC-Dagregister as Krotoa en Krotöa weergegee.  Nou het haar naam klaar gemetamorfoseer tot Krotoä.  Daar word sommer anvaar dat Eva se kinders by Pieter Meerhoff in die Kaap-Hollandse gemeenskap opgeneem is en stamouers van verskeie ‘Afrikaner’ families geword het.  Daar bestaan slegs dokumentêre bewyse van Eva-afstammelinge vanaf haar dogter Pieternella (Mev. Daniel Zaaiman).  Baie van Eva se nageslag is nie noodwendig  ‘Afrikaners’ nie.  Eva-nasate identifiseer hulself, of word aanvaar, nie noodwendig as ‘Afrikaners’ nie.

Artistieke vryheid teenoor historiese akkuraatheid

Kunstenaars het vryheid tot kreatiwiteit.  Maar hoe beoordeel ons artistieke kreatiwiteit wat agter historiese akkuraatheid skuil?  Is dit nie oneerlik of misleidend nie?  ‘n Kinderboek oor ‘n denkbeeldige lewensverhaal van Krotoa word voorgegee as ‘n ware verhaal.  Eva word selfs deur nie-bestaande familielede in ‘n fiktiewe epiese gedig omring. Skielik word sy voorgestel as die suster van nGai en die dogter van Maqona.  Laasgenoemde lyk toevallig soos Maqoma die Xhosa hoofman en Robben-eiland banneling wie se naam onlangs op ‘n Robbeneiland-pontskuit te siene is.  Word ons on(der)bewustelik voorberei vir polities ‘korrekte’ sienings:  die inheemse Khoe/San is sommer ‘n uitbreiding van die Nguni onderhorig aan Xhosa  heerskappy van Suid-Afrika se geskiedenis?  In ‘n teaterstuk opgevoer deur Antoinette Pienaar word hierdie artistieke vryheid deur ‘n hervertolking van die denkbeeld omvergegooi. Die voordraer se uitgangspunt verskyn in die program van die een-vrouteaterstuk.


In die opvoering is daar nie gestreef om by die letter van die geskiedenis te hou nie, maar om ‘n vrye, digterlike vertolking aan die karakter van Krotoa te gee.  Antoinette se intens persoonlike indentifikasie met beide Krotoa en Pieternella, geïnspireer deur Karen Press se gedig “Krotoa’s Story”, het ‘n deurslaggewende rol gespeel.  In die eerste plaas [sic], is die produksie ‘n dramatisering van Krotoa se geïnternaliseerde konflik, hoe sy die konfrontasie tussen kulture en waardes ervaar.  Die versoening tussen kulture word dan ook weerspieël in die gebruik van beide Afrikaans en Engels.

In hierdie musiek-drama word Krotoa se storie vertel deur haar oudste dogter, Pieternella.

Eva en haar dogter, Pieternella Zaaiman, word op die verhoog uitgespeel.  As volksuiting word Krotoa klaarblyklik deur Afrikaners toe-geëien.  Hulle is tog óók Africans ! Is dít hoekom daar hierop hewig gereageer word? Hierdie African identiteit word blykbaar weer opgeeis of moet weer onderhandel word.

Die voordraer se respek vir die historiese rekord is onmiskenbaar:

…Oor die kritiek dat die solo-stuk nie histories korrek is nie, sê sy:  “Dis my interpretasie van haar, nie ‘n geskiedenisles nie.  Daar bestaan geen  [sic] ware rekords van Krotoa nie, net ‘n storie wat oor en oor vertel is en telkens ‘n nuwe stertjie bygekry het.  Hierdie is my stertjie…” [Antoinette Pienaar]

Krotoa se vryspraak verwek verlossing

Aansprake op Eva se ‘bloed’ deur mense – wie se voorouers geen verwantskap met Eva se voorouers wou erken het nie –  word bevraagteken.  Hoe weet ons of ons-my-jou-hulle voorouers enige verwantskap met Eva se voorouers ontken het?  Eva word as “onse ma” gekonstrueer.  Dit veroorsaak ‘n  geheueverlies. Hierdie ‘moeder van die Afrikaner volk’ is al vergeet.  Deur Eva te onthou, hoop haar vergeetagtige kinders om ‘n voordeel uit aansprake op ‘n African indentiteit te trek.  Teatergangers, en Afrikaners in die algemeen, word nou veroordeel omdat hulle nie meer ‘vergeet’ nie.  Hulle onthou skielik, maar blykbaar vir die ‘verkeerde’ redes.  Net een ander ‘bewys’ van so  ‘n siening (deur ‘n ‘professionele’ persoon) bestaan:

… And in amateur [sic] genealogical circles white [sic] people compete to discover that they are descended from Krotoä [sic], the “stammoeder” (founding mother) of the Afrikaner [sic] [Carli Coetzee].

Bevestiging en openbaarmaking word nie toegelaat nie.  Dankbare nasate, gedagtig aan die tragedie omtrent hulle inheemse voorouer, word verhoed om hierdie historiese realiteit in die gesig te staar.  Nog erger:  hulle biologiese en genealogiese afstamming, wat regmatig (of onregmatig) hulle s’n is, word van hulle ontneem:

… Claiming Krotoä [sic] as the foremother who will make everything better because all will be forgiven risks distorting the significance of her life.  Better it is to remember her…as the mother of conflict, rather than unity.  Better to remember that her silence is not a sign of forgiveness …[Carli Coetzee]

Wat is die betekenis van Eva se lewe?  Ons word nie ingelig nie.  Wie het die monopolie oor hierdie betekenis van haar lewe?  “Haar swye”?  Wat word hiermee bedoel?  Hoe weet ons dat alles vergewe sal word?  Deur wie?  Eva?  Wat help emotiewe  argumente om Eva beter te verstaan?

Die Khoe-sanitasie van Krotoa – die ontmaskering van na-apartheid Krotoa-afstammelinge:

Die herlewing van Khoisan bewustheid, waarin die skrywer self aktief betrokke is, het tot verder verdraaings van Eva Meerhoff se nalatenskap gelei.  ‘n Handjievol Eva-afstammelinge – alhoewel hulle blank-lykend of blank-geklassifiseerd (amptelik of nie) is – het hulle inheemse afkoms lank vóór die herroeping van apartheid begin verkondig. Oningeligte kontemporêre kommentators, glo – verkeerdelik – dat aanspraak op direkte afstamming van Eva Meerhoff, ‘n heersende na-apartheidse nagedagte is.  ‘n Besoekende Nederlandse historikus, byvoorbeeld,  het dié fout gemaak. By die Universiteit van Wes-Kaapland se internasionale konferensie Khoisan Identities and Cultural Heritage te Kaapstad op 12-16 Julie 1997 verkondig sy:

…Today, Van Riebeeck is not the ‘good guy’ who brought civilisation to a heathenish country.  Having Khoikhoi ancestors is no longer a taboo.  Mansell Upham, spokesperson for the Griqua National Conference, even claims to be a direct descendant of Krotoa, the young interpreter of commander van Riebeeck and the first Khoikhoi woman to live amongst the Dutch at the Cape.  The colonists gave the girl a Christian name:  Eva …[Andrea Kieskamp]

By hierdie einste internasionale Khoisan konferensie was daar net twee deelnemers met gedokumenteerde afkoms van ‘n Khoi/San persoon in die 17de-eeu.  Altwee was  sogenaamde ‘blankes’ en nie skaam om Khoe/San afkoms oor die jare te openbaar nie – Dr Hans Heese en die skrywer van hierdie artikel.  Die ironie is onlangs deur Dr Heese by ‘n genealogiese vergadering op Stellenbosch uitgebuit.

Die heel eerste deelname van ‘mense van Khoesan afkoms’ (dws Khoesan op die oog af) en hulle verteenwoordigende organisasies by so ‘n internasionale konferensie, het bedenkinge in the akademiese wêreld uitgelok:

…The extensive changes in South Africa since 1994 have created new opportunities for redressing past injustices.  Some Khoisan descendants have begun asserting forms of cultural identity based on idealized images of the past that seem to owe more to trends in Western scholarship than to documentary evidence …[Gerald Klinghardt]

‘n Vergadering van Khoesan mense by die SA Kunsmuseum het ‘n  akademikus so laat reageer:

… Claims to propriety over KhoiSan bodies and the ‘emotional reserves’ of the San genocide were made by representatives of a variety of KhoiSan groups including the Griqua, the Brown Movement, and the militant Coloured Nationalist Kleurling Weerstandbeweging (KWB).  The biological essentialism of some of these groups elided the historical fact that many of the people referring to themselves as Brown, Coloured, and Griqua are in fact [sic] of slave-European-African [sic]-Khoi-San ancestry.  However, rather than recognizing this mixed ancestry and cultural hybridity, many KhoiSan activists claimed a ‘pure’ KhoiSan identity based on notions of biological and cultural continuity.  Others did not deny their mixed ancestry but asserted biologically based claims to KhoiSan identity to gain custodianship over the KhoiSan body and collective memory.  For example, even though he had been classified white under apartheid, Mansel [sic] Upham, the Griqua National Conference’s legal representative, insisted upon making public his claims of genealogical links to a founding Khoi ancestress, Krotoä  [sic] (Eva) … [Steven Robins]

Maar opvattings oor verbastering weerspreek mekaar nog steeds:

…The admission of, or claim to, hybrid identity and Khoikhoi blood can have a conservative impulse: it risks forgetting the conflict and destruction involved in the mix …[Carli Coetzee]

Dan het ons ander sienings: Krotoa as verraaier en Eva as stamouer van hedendaagse her-geskape of her-gefabriseerde Khoikhoi.  Die nuwe eksponente van Eva Meerhoff is vasbeslote dat haar nalatenskap uitsluitlik tot, en met, die Khoisan beperk word.  Daar is selfs mistieke menings oor Eva Meerhoff as eksklusiewe stammoeder van die  Khoi/San:

… It may be thought disrespectful to delve in the personal affairs of Khoisan ancestors.  I do not think so.  We can only value the lives of our ancestors when we have full realization of what they were up against.  Their achievements must be measured against the circumstances of their lives.  I have found it more disturbing to think of Eva as a ‘woman between’ … I cannot see Eva as ‘a woman between’.  She was most certainly a Khoisan woman, and one whose life was inseparable from the fate of her people … [Yvette Abrahams]

Die moontlike gemengde  (Strandloper )afkoms van Eva sélf word nooit in aanmerking geneem nie.  Europieërs het vanaf 1620 – lank vóór Van Riebeeck – gereeld die Kaap die Goeie Hoop besoek.

Die kreolisering van Eva

Eva Meerhoff se kreolisering word nietemin deur sommige mense aanvaar.  Sy word met Pocahontas en Doña Marina vergelyk.  Dié twee inheemse vrouens (en tolke) en hulle direkte afstammelinge onderskeidelik is beslis in die ‘blank’ kultuur van Spanje/Mexiko en Engeland/Nieu-Engeland opgeneem:

 … Eight years after their abandonment, two of her children were taken by a friend of their father to Mauritius, where one of them, Petronella, made a rather splendid marriage with a well-to-do Dutchman.  Of their eight children they named one Eva for her grandmother, and eventually they brought young Eva and her siblings back to the Cape where her grandmother’s sad story had begun and ended.  No matter what the attitude of the godly residents of the Cape colony toward her mother and no matter what fearful memories from childhood remained with her, Petronella Zaijman [sic] had found it in her heart to create a new Eva and bring her up Dutch … [Frances Karttunen]

Krotoa haarself – wie gee eintlik om? Die behoefte aan ‘n herkonstrueerde biografie

… maar met die oerkreet

van alle dinge

smyt ek my tartende

skreeu in die sterre in,

waar ylweg my smart

weerklink langs die steiltes…

– N.P. van Wyk Louw, ‘Skreeu’, Alleenspraak (Een: 1932-1934)

Wat dan is núút omtrent Krotoa?  Wat wil historici en navorsers nie openbaar nie?  Hoekom bestaan daar ‘n beperkte, selektiewe kultuur van ondersoek?  Hoekom is daar tot nou toe nie veel gedoen nie?

Vir ‘n tydperk van meer as 20 jaar het die skrywer:

  • gepoog om al haar kinders en ook hulle afstammelinge te identifiseer
  • die kerkrekords gedurende haar leeftyd getranskribeer
  • die bestaande Compagnie rekords deeglik bestudeer
  • al die beskikbare gepubliseerde verwysings van Eva probeer vergelyk en verwerk
  • in die openbaar oor Eva gepraat met die doel om haar aan ‘n wyer publiek voor te stel
  • ‘n diepe studie gemaak van die koloniale gemeenskap en die indiwidue wat  direk (of indirek) met haar verkeer het
  • Eva se lewe binne die konteks van sigbaar toenemende anti-Khoe gevoelens onder die VOC  en die koloniale gemeenskap uitgepluis
  • alreeds in 1977 met die navorsing begin – beslis nie om Afrikanerskap te regverdig nie

Selfs nou is ek huiwerig om my bevindings te kodifiseer: Ek is verskulding aan Krotoa se nagedagtenis as  stammoeder.  Ook in terme van hoe ek die behoefte van ‘n oop definisie van die waarheid verstaan.  Die bedoeling is om ‘n hergekonstrueerde biografie uit te bring wat die gedokumenteerde lewe van Eva Meerhoff meer volledig sal uitlê.  Dit staan kunstenaars en ideoloë vry om Krotoa verder te bedink.  Ten minste behoort ons beter toegerus te wees.  Sodoende kan ons vasstel hoe ernstig hulle in rekening gehou moet word en watter geloofwaardigheid aan hulle fantasieë gegee moet word.

Kan ons saamstem met die verwerping van die historiese Pocahontas soos deur Frances Mossiker (Pocahontas: The Life and Legend ) uiteengesit?:

… But the Powhatan princess was not to be confined within genealogical links, nor could the First Families of Virginia exercise rights of exclusivity over her.  She has escaped into legend …

Ek dink nie so nie.  Kan ons akkoord gaan met Michael Pye in sy biografiese roman (The Drowning Room) oor Gretje Reyniers – Nieu-Amsterdam (New York) se eerste gedokumenteerde hoer?  Hy regverdig  artistieke vryheid as gevolg van ‘n gebrek aan gedokumenteerde bewyse,

… conjuring out of other people’s generalities…a version….she left no trace…so she is available to be invented…I have invented her in this book which is dangerous.  If she isn’t satisfied with the flesh I’ve found for her,  I’ll hear …

Ek dink nie so nie.  Ter wille van Krotoa, hoekom moet sy in moderne ‘legendes’ verdwyn?  Om Eva se onthalwe, hoekom moet sy aan fabrisering onderwerp word?

Eva Meerhoff, gebore Krotoa is my regstreekse biologiese en gedokumenteerde stammoeder.  Die onvervreembare reg tot inheemsheid sal ek nóóit prysgee nie. Ek behou die reg om myself as o.a.  African te identifiseer­.  

Krotoa’s Presentist Enslavement

by Mansell Upham

Sketch of an unknown Khoe woman by Samuel Daniell (1775 – 16 December 1811)

Recently there has been an sinister resurgence of questionable claims by some detractors on social media that both my father’s and mother’s mutual ancestor, the in/famous Cape indigene Krotoa – later Eva Meerhoff – was a ‘slave’ in Jan van Riebeeck’s household. Such claims have subsequently been pointed out by many to be unfounded. Yet these same diehard, ideologically-blinded, detractors continue to riposte by rationalising that Krotoa had never been paid for her services so that effectively she would have worked and been treated (albeit not legally) as a ‘slave’.

We learn from the resolution (12 April 1664) by the Council of Policy attended by visiting VOC Commissioner Dirk Steur – who in this session outranks the Cape Commander – that, not only is Krotoa’s future lawful husband, Meerhoff, promoted from junior surgeon to surgeon with the accompanying increase in salary, but that his wife-to-be had not hitherto been paid for her services by the VOC – even though she had been provided with food and clothing (cost en clederen).

Consequently, she was now to receive a dowry of 50 Rixdollars (on par with what the Company would usually give to one of their own ‘children’ / ‘servants’) accompanied with a celebratory bridal feast:

een bruijtsgave (gelijck men Comps. kinderer pleegh te doen) soude vereren met een somme van vyftigh rijcxdaelders, ende soo haest te saamen getrouwt sullen weesen een vrolijcken maeltijt: …

Worth noting, is that this resolution is also signed by two other VOC officials of note, my double paternal ancestor, the private slave Maaij Ansela van Bengale`s 3rd registered owner:

  • Abraham Gabbema (from The Hague)

and Krotoa`s fellow indigene (later the tragic suicide) Zara`s employer,

  • Hendrik Lacus (from Wesel in the Duchy of Cleves) …

More about Dircq Janssen Steur

He sits (November 1656) on the Council of Justice at Batavia [Jakarta, Java, Indonesia] during the trial of my multiple ancestor (both maternal and paternal), the private slave Catharina (Groote Catrijn) van Paliacatta for killing her slave lover Claes van Malabar at Rijswijck in Batavia.

He rises quickly in the VOC ranks:

  • serving in Burma [Myanmar] (December 1635);
  • junior merchant (ondercoopman) (1637);
  • merchant (coopman) (1640);
  • vice-president of Council of Justice (1650);
  • raad extraordinaris of India (1651);
  • active on the Coromandel Coast (November 1651) negotiating with the Moghul vizier at Golconda Mir Jumla II (1591-30 March 1663) (مير جملا), subahdar of Bengal under Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb;
  • president of Council of Justice in Batavia (1653);
  • raad ordinaris of India (1657) and admiral of return fleet (December 1663-August 1664) stopping over at the Cape of Good Hope as VOC Commissioner (31 March-16 April 1664) …

He also stops over previously (1661) at the Cape of Good Hope witnessing (28 April 1661) the following baptism:

Den 28:en d:[it]o [April 1661] heeft dom:e [Johannis] Doncker een predikatie gedaen, ende gedoopt het kint, van den opperkoopman, De Langhe, bescheiden op ‘t schip genaemt Dordrecht van wegen de kamer van Delfft, ende is genaemt, Volckera Elijsabeth de getuigen zijn d’ e: heer Dirck Steur ordinaris raet van India, ende Elijsabeth van Berckel m:[adam?]e vrou van Haemstee, Godt de Heere geeft dat dit gedoopte kint tot zijne naems eere mach opwassen

Naturally, he would have been fully apprised of Krotoa`s utilization as Company interpreter …

An Impact Minimal, yet Phenomenal –

The genealogical impact of the ‘Angola’ and ‘Guinea’ slaves at the Cape of Good Hope in the 17th century

by Mansell Upham

Sculpture (Kingston, Jamaica) commemorating slaves transported from Africa`s Slave Coast

Thus more and more the kingdoms are extended;

Thus more and more are black and yellow spread,

This from the ground a wall of stone is raised,

On which the thundering brass can no impression make.

For Hottentots were always earthen,

But now we come with stone to boast before all men,

And terrify not only Europeans, but also

Asians, Americans and savage Africans.

Thus Holy Christendom is glorified;

Establishing its seats amidst the savage heathens.

We praise the Great Director, and say with one another:

“Augustus’s dominion, nor Conquering Alexander,

Nor Caesar’s mighty genius, has ever had the glory

To lay a corner stone at Earth’s Extremest End!”

VOC Journal: Cape of Good Hope (2 January 1666) – poem, now buried and no longer visible, carved into foundation stone of Casteel de Goede Hoop and unveiled (2 January 1666) (English translation by H.C.V. Leibbrandt) [1]

Casteel de Goede Hoop, Cape Town

The 1st shipment of slaves  en masse – from Angola -to the Cape of Good Hope arrives unexpectedly (28 March 1658) with the ship Amersfoort. The slave cargo is originally taken when this Dutch East Indiaman captures at sea – off the South American coast – a Portuguese prize (neger prys – literally `negro prize`) of 125 slaves originally destined for the ‘New World’.

Bay of Luanda [Teekening van de baai La Wanda St. Poulo (Loanda de St. Paulo) met het daarvoor liggende eiland – Leupe Catalogue, Atlas of Mutual Heritage]

This is soon followed – barely more than a month later (6 May 1658) – by the ship Hasselt sent from the Cape to purchase slaves along the west coast of Africa.  The ship brings 228 slaves – from Guinea – purchased at Popo [now Grand Popo] on the coast of present-day Benin (formerly Dahomey). 

The slaves arriving (1658) on the Amersfoort (125 souls) and the Hasselt (228 souls) are the only two shipments of forced migrants from West and Central Africa ever brought to the Dutch East India Company (VOC) colonially occupied Cape of Good Hope (`The Cape`). 

These slaves and their genealogically significant offspring are almost all conspicuous by their absence and/or exclusion in seminal published works on the origins of Boer / Afrikaner / South African colonial families. The healthiest and youngest of the survivors (92 Angola and 80 Guinea slaves) are reshipped to Batavia [Jakarta].

Those remaining at the Cape soon dwindle in numbers. The handful that ultimately survive making an early appearance in the written record are collated, identified and their genealogical impact and contribution (where known) to the colony`s (and ultimately South Africa’s) population assessed. A few, incorporated into colonial households, even become domesticated and manumitted.  As free citizens they are known in the colony as ‘free-blacks’ (also ‘free-burghers’) – theoretically on par with their fellow European / White / Christian colonists becoming registered land and slave owners in their own right. 

Of these, only 3 men and 2 Guinea women from have recorded manumissions and only 3 men and 5 Angola women.

These free-blacks and their descendants (as well as liberated halfslag (‘half-caste’) children of manumitted Company slaves from Angola and Guinea) – become, to a much greater extent,  largely assimilated into the earliest colonially induced and culturally Protestant European dominant `free` population unlike their increasingly numbered counterparts imported from Madagascar and the East Indies.  Consequently, their descendants contribute majorly to the latter-day, interlarded Afrikaans-speaking `White` Afrikaner – and thereafter also to ‘Coloured’ communities and the so-called ‘English-speaking South African’ / ‘Anglo-African’ communities.

Thereafter, the Cape relies on shipments sent from Madagascar, East Africa, De la Goa Bay [Maputo] and excess slaves ex Batavia [Jakarta] and Ceylon [Sri Lanka] that the VOC, English and Danes can spare who become less and less incorporated into ‘white’ colonial society as the slave population / work force burgeons – apart from the more or less consolidated and now colonially entrenched free-burgher population.

Thus ends any further significant recorded Angolan and Guinean admixture into the origins of the Cape of Good Hope’s colonially induced inhabitants.  Descendants of these singular shiploads of Angolan and Guinean slaves ramify and form the substratum of the emerging not-quite-white colonial society at the tip of Africa.   

Ever since 1652, the genealogical impact on the colonial Cape of Good Hope-born population by the initial cargo of slaves from Angola and Guinea brought to South Africa (1658), is clearly minimal when contrasted with all the other more numerous uprooted individuals and groups brought over the centuries to the colony, either as officials, settlers (burghers), refugees, political exiles, slaves or convicts.

That there remained any slaves from Angola and Guinea resilient enough to leave behind recorded progeny, is indeed remarkable.

Grand Popo in more recent times …

The genealogical legacy of these early deracinated and displaced West and Central black Africans – a mere handful – is such that some of their descendants nevertheless ramify significantly, forming an indelible part of the Cape’s early colonial free populace at the bottom tip of Africa – Earth`s Extremest End – thus helping to form and solidify the substratum of what diversified into the racially stratified ‘White’ and ‘Coloured’ Afrikaans- and English-speaking minority colonially induced population(s) of Southern Africa. 

They also qualify – ironically – as core ancestors of today’s self-identified (‘white’) Afrikaners. Descendants of these singular shiploads of Angola and Guinea slaves and who form the substratum of the emerging not-quite-white colonial society at the tip of Africa, already successfully identified amongst the following old Cape families, include inter alia:  

Bantjes, Basson, Broeders, Colijn, Coos, Duuring, Ehrenhaut, Eksteen, Hoffman, Holmberg, Jacobs, Jonker, Kraak, Langeveld, Oberholzer, Peters, Ronnenkamp, van der Schelde, van der Schyff, Stavorinus, Steyn, Stockenström, Stolts, Treurnicht, Verbeek, Vermeulen, van Zyl.  

Point of No Return: Monument along the Road of the Slaves in Benin commemorating the countless Africans sold as slaves (16th-19th centuries) [Photo Credit: Atlantide Phototravel / Corbis]

Minimal, yet phenomenal – albeit not insubstantial in terms of traceable descendants – their offspring nevertheless make up an integral and inalienable part of the broader indigenous African community.  The observations of the scholar Priscilla Felicity de Wet are worth quoting in this context:[2]  

However, the issue of indigenous in RSA remains a pertinent question as decisions are left largely to the leaders in Government institutions and departments. In an interview with the National Minister of Arts and Culture, Mr Pallo Jordan, regarding the visit of United Nations Special Rapporteur, Rudolpho Stavenhagen, he argued that the Department of Arts and Culture regarded everyone who was of African descent as indigenous except the immigrant groups from Europe and Asia. He added that the Khoekhoe did not suffer as much as the Africans [sic – black or Bantu-speaking Africans] and their indigenous languages are virtually non-existent with Afrikaans or English being their first language now. He continued that during apartheid the Khoekhoe received more privileges than the Africans did and finished by saying that“We have to bring political stability, social harmony and economic prosperity to SA and one way of doing that is to credit our common ancestral heritage”.

Media Statement 10 August 2005
Mr Pallo Jordan – erstwhile National Minister of Arts and Culture (2004-2009) who was forced to step down as Minister of Arts and Culture after it was discovered that he lied about his academic record …

The time is long overdue for these antecedent black African forced migrants from Angola and Guinea to be recognized as individual people in their own right and acknowledged for their contributing role in the making of modern South Africa also by their descendants. These slaves and their genealogically significant offspring have never been individually, comprehensively and properly identified in terms of their specific West or Central African origins.  Indeed, they are almost all conspicuous by their very absence and/or exclusion in the seminal published works on the origins of Boer / Afrikaner / South African colonial families, viz.:[3]

Christoffel Coetzee de Villiers (1850-1887)
  • Christoffel Coetzee de Villiers / George McCall Theal`s Geslacht-Register der Ou Kaapsche Familien (1893-1894)[reworked by Dr. Cornelis C. Pama (ed.) as Geslagsregister van die Ou Kaapse Families / Genealogies of Old South African Families (A.A. Balkema, Cape Town 1966),
  • H.T. Coelenbrander`s De Afkomst der Boeren (Amsterdam 1902),
  • Dr. Johannes August Heese`s Die Herkoms van die Afrikaner (A.A. Balkema, Cape Town 1971); and
  • Dr. Hans Friedrich Heese`s Groep Sonder Grense: Die rol en status van die gemengde bevolking aan die Kaap, 1652-1795 (Institute for Historical Research, University of the Western Cape, Bellville 1984)
Mansell Upham with Dr. Hans Friedriech Heese in front of the Cape Archives, Roeland Street, Cape Town

Nevertheless, subsequent revisionist efforts by historians / researchers such as Drs.:

  • Johann Max Heinrich Hoge (1886-1960),
  • Johannes August Heese (1907-1990),
  • Hans Friedrich Heese (born 1944) and
  • Johannes Leon Hattingh,
Dr. Johannes August Heese (1907-1990)

have opened the way for a more inclusive and deracialized inquiry into the origins of the Boer / Afrikaner and their extended Coloured and English families. There is no doubt that tracing especially enslaved individuals in the colonial written record in general is no easy undertaking; yet one important question persists:  why have the more immediate, or obvious male-line, direct descendants of these imported black African slaves themselves neglected for so long to investigate more fully their colonial beginnings? Curiously, during the heyday of institutionalized apartheid, influential Afrikaner representative political and church leaders, e.g.

Dr. Andries Treurnicht (1921-1993)
  • Dr. Andries Petrus Treurnicht (1921-1993) author of Credo van `n Afrikaner affirming white European purity and denying non-European ancestry; and
  • Professor Johan Adam Heyns (1928-1994) – assassinated verligte Dutch Reformed Church Moderator,

both of whose family names point to either Guinea or Angola slave descent (presuming there are no breaks in their direct line of male descent) –  do not seem to have felt any real need to confront more directly and publicly the written record always closely at hand.

Prof. Johan Heyns (1928-1994)

General amnesia, ignorance, presumption, denial and suppression of slave / indigenous heritage – understandable perhaps – presumably goes hand in glove with inherited patriarchal systems and/or perceived misogyny and the repression of maternal descent (not necessarily without female complicity) by the adoption, acquiescence and entrenchment of the overriding convention of carrying over one`s father`s surname and/or adopting one`s husband`s family name.

Dr. Anna J. Böeseken (1906-1997) 

In this regard, the invaluable and inestimable pioneering works (also collaborative) of Margaret Cairns (1912-2009) and Dr. Anna J. Böeseken (1906-1997) on ‘people of colour’, early Cape women and slavery ultimately  uprooted and prized open our hitherto mostly neglected, forgotten and buried matriarchal heritage.

Margaret Cairns, born Twentyman-Jones (1912-2009)

[1] H.C.V. Leibbrandt, Précis of the Archives of the Cape of Good Hope: Journal (1662-1670), p. 170].  Elizabeth Conradie, Hollandse skrywers uit Suid-Afrika. Deel 1 (1652-1875), notes: “Die afdruk by LEIBBRANDT: Precis of the Archives sit vol klein foutjies” and quotes the original Dutch version:

Den eersten steen van ‘t nieuwe Casteel goede hope

heeft WAGENAER gelegt met hoop van goede Hope.


Soo werden voort en voort de rijcken uitgespreyt

Soo werden al de swart’, en geluwen gepreyt

Soo doet men uijtter aerd, een steene wal oprechten

daer ‘t donderend metael, seer weynigh can ophechten

Voor Hottentoos waren ‘t eerteijts aerde wallen

nu comt men hier met steen voor anderen oock brallen

dus maekt men dan een schricq, soowel d’Europiaen

als voor den Aes: Amer: en wilde Africaen

dus wordt beroemt gemaeckt, ‘t geheijlich christendom

die setels stellen in het woeste heijdendom

wij loven ‘t groot bestier, en zeggen met malkander

Augustus heerschappij, noch winnet Alexander,

noch Caesar’s groot beleijt, zyn noijt daermee gewaerd

met leggen van een steen, op ‘t eijnde van de Aerd.

Nigel Worden, Elizabeth van Heyningen and Vivian Bickford-Smith, The Making of a City] provide an alternative, more literal. translation:

Our conquests are extending further and further and all black and yellow people are being suppressed.

We are building a stone wall out of the earth, that thundering canon cannot destroy. Before, against, our Hottentots, our walls were built of earth.

Now we can boost of stone against other enemies.

In this way we frighten off the Europeans, as well as the Asians, the Americans and the wild Africans.

In this way holy Christendom is made known and finds a place in wild, heathen lands.

We praise the almighty reign of God and say in unison: Augustus’ empire:

victorious Alexander and Caesar’s great kingdom –none of these had the honor of laying a stone at the end of the earth’ Cape Town.

[2] Priscilla Felicity de Wet, “Make our Children Proud of the heritage” – A case study of the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic communities in SA with specific reference to the emerging Khoe and San Indigenous Peoples in the Republic of South Africa, Master Degree Programme in Indigenous Studies (Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tromsø, Spring 2006)

[3] The article by J.M. Greeff, `Deconstructing Jaco – Genetic heritage of an Afrikaner`, Annals of Human Genetics (22 May 2007) is a case in point – still utilizing uncritically published (but unprocessed) data on “non-European founder ancestors” where the Angola and Guinea components hardly feature; and where they do, incorrectly.

King Gezo of Dahomey: “The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth … the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…”